From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Sat Nov 1 00:00:58 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 00:00:58 -0000 Subject: Percival Ignatius In-Reply-To: <006901c3a004$eb60aa40$1885aec7@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83932 Hi all, What is following is rather messy, I'm afraid. I couldn't find time to read the messages during the last weeks (too much work in the muggle world ) , but finally I found my way back to HPfGU. So if there's nothing new in what I write, don't put the blame on me. Mary Jo wrote: "I was surprised to find out that Percy's middle name is Ignatius. This is disclosed during the hearing conducted by Umbridge concerning Harry's fighting off the dementors. I have puzzled over the significance of his middle name, and have a few ideas, but am unsure if any of them are correct. I would love to hear what everyone else thinks. 1, My hobby is genealogy, and when I find someone named Ignatius in my research, the name always means that the family was Roman Catholic at the time the name was given. However, in the WW we don't have any religions, so I don't think is really relevant. 2. Could St. Ignatius of Loyola be somehow a model for Percy? I know that St. Ignatius of Loyola was originally a soldier, and when he was an invalid from wounds received during battle, he read a book about the life of a saint, and decided to try to be a saint himself. Does this part of his life represent ambitious Percy? St. Ignatius later said that the biggest and most important thing he had to learn was humility. Are we going to see Percy humbled? Or is he in reality already an undercover spy? The order St. Ignatius did institute became famous for its excellent education and teaching of logic. Perhaps this is an indication that Percy will end up as the teacher at Hogwarts. I am not fully satisfied with any of these ideas. Does anyone else think that his middle name is somehow a clue?" Now me : After your post, a discussion about religious belonging in the Wizarding World started ; I'd like to come back to your original purpose. I like the idea of a similitude between Percy and the Jesuits. I don't know much ado about the order in the current time. But I had to study the part they played in political life during the 18th century. To summarise, they were a preoccupation for kings and their governments. They used to be the teachers of aristocracy; they were also confessors of several kings. They were close to power. The problem was that the constitutions of their order stipulated that they had to be loyal to the Pope. For that reason, some governments suspected them to be spies in the pay of Vatican, and it was a problem, because in the 18th century, European states, like France, or Spain, were trying to escape from the Curia's political influence. Well this is REALLY a summary, but I'm not here to analyse political life in the 18th century, I'm here because of Percy. In OotP, we can clearly see that the Wizarding World is in a difficult political situation, because of its own inertia. From one part, there's the Ministry and the Wizengamot; they are defending ideas that can lead to a disaster, they don't want things to change and pretend to interfere in Hogwarts. They act right the way Curia did in the states of 18th century, for instance France. At the time, there was an intellectual movement called `les Lumi?res' (the Lights); philosophers like Diderot, Rousseau, Voltaire, D'Alembert were working in order to make society progress. It was a time of debate, of calling into question the institutions. The Philosophers used to denounce the Curia's influence in the political life of their state, and they were rather anticlerical. There were also Masons, who were following the same purpose. They all were of course the target of Roma, and Curia did not accept all the books they published, like the Encyclop?die. Masons were excommunicated. Do you see where I'm going to? No? Well, from the other part, there are Dumbledore and his followers, and they are exactly like Diderot and his friends. The way they act, the way they think, or teach, or belong to a same group is calling into question the WW and its institutions. The WW is very like a society of the Ancient Regime, with slavery (the elves), segregation (Pure Bloods and Muggles, Wizards and other magical creatures). This world is about to split if nothing is done. Voldemort is not only a menace, he's also revealing how rotten from inside the Wizarding World is. But nor the Ministry, nor the Wizengamot seem to realise. On the very contrary, they are afraid of looking clearly what is happening. They pretend to ignore that Giants, Centaurs, Goblins, Elves are not treated in the right way. They don't want to see that repeating the same errors is the open door to auto-destruction. And when Fudge thinks he is in danger of loosing his power because of Hogwarts and Dumbledore, he acts exactly the same Curia did in the France of Diderot and Voltaire: he tries to neutralise them. And he sends them a High Inquisitor, Dolores Umbridge. A High Inquisitor Think about Bernardo Gui and Fra Jorge in "Il nome della Rosa", by Umberto Eco. Umbridge acts exactly the same: she tortures, she pretends to come back to a purely scholastic teaching of DADA Well, I think that I'm going too far from the "Percival Ignatius" purpose. So, back to young Mr Weasley, and to Jesuits. I wrote that Jesuits were loyal to the Pope. Percy acts the same when he chooses to support Fudge against Dumbledore and his own family. It's quite normal if we consider how the character behaves since the beginning of the series: he's always loyal to the most important authority he has to deal with. He's a "perfect prefect" and a "perfect Head Boy" while he has to obey Dumbledore's rules. When he starts working for the Ministry, he's ready to everything in order to serve his boss. What happens in OotP is logical. How could Mr Weasley or Dumbledore have more importance than Fudge, the "Big Boss" of the Wizarding World? And there we have to come back to Jesuits in the 18th century: though they claimed they were loyal to the Pope, Vatican suspected them of trying to gain power in their own interest. To gain power: do you remember the title Percy is reading in a bookshop of Diagon Alley at the beginning of Cos? As an evidence of suspicion Vatican had towards Jesuits, remember that it did nothing to protect the order when France and Spain expulsed it (1761 and 1767), and that in 1773, Pope Clemente XIV decided to suppress the Company. Gaining power, serving their own ambition through an apparent loyalty to both the King and the Pope: that's the clich? literature developed about Jesuits, in the 18th and the 19th centuries. Think about "Candide" by Voltaire (the episodes in Paraguay)or about "Vingt ans apr?s" by Alexandre Dumas (the Man in the Iron Mask affair; if you don't know the novel, you certainly saw the movie with Di Caprio, and with Jeremy Irons as Aramis, the artful musketeer who is also a Jesuit and the leader of the plot). Maybe JKR had the same clich? on her mind when she decided that Percy's second name would be Ignatius. It opens the door to many options: Percy being a double agent (serving both the Ministry and Dumbledore), or Percy joining Voldemort's side if he considers that the Dark Lord is able to take the power Percival Ignatius, a metaphor of the thirst for power and its disastrous consequences? Just one more word before ending this looong post: "Ignatius" sounds like a Latin word, "Ignarus". This word means "who doesn't know; who is ignorant". Is Percy really conscious of the consequences of his acts and decisions? Isn't he also a metaphor of blindness? Amicalement, Iris From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Sat Nov 1 00:30:34 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 00:30:34 -0000 Subject: Harry Potter in 80s movie In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83933 I don't know the movie called "Troll". However, this threat about 80's movies makes me think about "Young Sherlock Holmes", by Barry Levinson.In this movie, Holmes and Watson are still teenagers and they attend a boarding school. One of their teachers (don't remember the name of the character, but the actor who plays the part is Anthony Higgins) is in reality the leader of a sect and a criminal. The matron of the school is in reality his sister. She's a member of the sect and there's a scene in which she takes out her lining and wig, revealing her bald head. Those two characters remind Quirrel and Crouch Jr. But there's especially Holmes's rival, a boy called Dudley. The young actor who plays the part has a pointed face and very smooth blond hair, just like Draco. Oh, and there's also an old professor, who looks mad but turns out to be a genius. Holmes defeats of course the leader of the sect. We learn at the end that this bad guy survived, to become Moriarty. In other words: Holmes creates his arch enemy, just the way Voldemort does with Harry. (That reminds me that it's what Batman explains to Joker,who killed his parents, in the first movie by Tim Burton). By the way: Chris Columbus wrote the scenario of "Young Sherlock Holmes". Coincidences, coincidences... Amicalement, Iris From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 1 01:25:12 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 01:25:12 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83934 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > > Laura wrote: > > "...Also, I'm not sure all of the tensions among the Order members > can be called petty. Yeah, Molly is way out of line throughout > OoP...." > > > > Paula now: > > > > Laura, why do you say Molly is way out of line? > > Laura: > > When she made that crack to Sirius about his not being a responsible godfather because he spent 12 years in Azkaban, I lost my patience with her. She started out as a loving, if ditzy, mom type. And there's no doubt that she has been kind and welcoming to Harry. But as we've seen more of her, we see that she can't let her kids learn independence. She treats them all like they were 4 years old, including anyone she decides to treat as her kid, i.e., Harry and Hermione. (Remember in GoF when she started being snotty to Hermione because of the story Rita wrote about Harry, Hermione and Viktor? That was just wrong.) << First place, Molly never says that Sirius was an irresponsible godfather. She says he's been known to act rashly, and everyone knows this is true. Sirius himself doesn't deny it. In fact, he knows that it was a rash act of his that led to his being imprisoned in Azkaban, and that's why Molly's taunt has so much sting to it. I'm not sure I understand what the Skeeter episode has to do with treating people like they're four years old. Molly was misled by Rita Skeeter, but who was to tell her things were otherwise? You think Ron wrote home and said, "Harry's all upset because the Prophet made Hermione out to be a scarlet woman and Harry doesn't like her that way at all?" Laura: > By the time we get to OoP, she has decided that she can ignore the wishes of Harry's parents and insert herself in loco parentis to Harry. Why?< Um, because Dumbledore asked her to? Because Harry's been writing Ron for a month asking when he can come to the Burrow? Molly put her own family at risk, first by giving Harry refuge from the Dursleys and then involving herself in the Order. Then Sirius said she didn't have any rights in Harry. That was pretty unfeeling of him. Especially when she'd spent the last month cleaning up *his* house, with out much help from him, apparently. If I had to keep house for a slob who insisted on keeping a horse-sized carnivore in his bedroom, and wasn't even grateful to me for it, I'd be pretty ticked off with him myself. Of course Molly's a little nuts by the time we see her in OOP. She's been fretting about Harry for a month and no happier about his being stuck at the Dursleys than he was. And she doesn't know why any more than Harry does. But she's the suck it up and deal type. She's trying to cope by putting the danger out of mind and assuring herself that Dumbledore knows best. But she has to put up with Sirius grumbling about Dumbledore all the time not to mention whatever wild talk Sirius indulged in. Probably hatching one halfbaked scheme after another to spring Harry from the Dursleys without Dumbledore's permission or lam it with him from the Ministry ditto. Laura: It's not like Harry went to Molly for advice > at any point throughout the 5 books. And that had to hurt. He wrote to Hermione, Sirius and Ron, but not her, the ungrateful pup. And after all those Christmas presents and birthday cakes too. :P Pippin From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 1 06:52:46 2003 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=) Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 06:52:46 +0000 (GMT) Subject: OPEN LETTER TO JK ROWLING OBE Message-ID: <20031101065246.91538.qmail@web25103.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 83935 OPEN LETTER TO JK ROWLING OBE October 31, 2003 Dear Ms Rowling, I want to thank you profoundly for writing the Harry Potter books. Others have commented on the outstanding literary and moral value of your great work. However in your work I have discovered a supernal Light that no one else seems to have. In your work I recognise the timeless Path of Human Liberation as taught by all the great spiritual leaders of humanity throughout the millennia. By liberation I mean no less than the complete liberation from the three dimensional time-spatial universe and entrance into the eternal Fathers House. This means liberation from death, disease and suffering, and especially from the evil within ourselves. I have been studying this Path and trying to put it into practice all my life. I have gone enough of this Path to know it brings complete and utter joy and happiness. When people first told me about Harry Potter they said it was a childrens book, and I didnt want to read it, but a dear friend pushed it into my hands and not to be rude I took it home. Out of curiosity I started reading it and immediately fell in love with Harry. Almost every sentence has a deep fascination and radiates a spiritual power which I have never before encountered in a book of fiction. As I continued reading (book 2) my hair started to stand on end. Here I recognized the very Path that I have devoted my life to! Hidden deeply but unmistakably underneath the excitement, the action and the mystery I recognized the outline of Gods plan for the redemption of fallen humanity more clearly than I have ever seen it in a work of fiction. Too many to mention are the sublime and refulgent symbols and archetypes which indicate the development along the Path of Return to the Fathers House. As soon as I came to the defeat of the basilisk I recognized the phase of the Path where the new immortal Soul-force kills the serpent of the kundalini coiled up at the bottom of the spine. This serpent-force represents the mistakes of all our past lives and our entire karma. I then realized Harry is the new Soul that is born when a person opens his heart to the Divine Force that is present in this world to bring back the prodigal son. I then quickly read book 1. Once again my spine tingled. Here was the detailed description of how a pure heart (Lily) and the thirsting for liberation (stag) are the prerequisites for the birth of the new Soul. The muggle world is OUR world, which is hostile to the new soul. At that stage I suddenly woke up to how close Harry Potter resembles the Alchemical Wedding of Christian Rosencreutz, published in 1616. Just like Harry, Christian Rosencreutz receives a letter of invitation during a storm and goes to a castle for seven periods of time. The list of other similarities is overwhelming. I quickly devoured books 3 and 4 and my astonishment increased. The Alchemical Wedding was ever more clearly present, and with breathtaking surprise I saw that Harry was going through the same phases of liberation as Christian Rosencreutz. In book 1 Harry is liberated from the desires of the physical plane in his rejection of what the Philosophers Stone could bring; in book 2 he frees Dobby, an etheric creature, symbolizing Harrys liberation on the etheric plane; in book 3 Harry overcomes the fear of fear, the most basic of all emotions, through his stag Patronus, which, as I recognized with a tremendous shock of joy, shows that no matter how strong the forces opposing us, our thirst for God (Psalm 42) will always save us. This is Harrys liberation on the astral plane. The symbol of the time-turner teaches us that the new Soul is beyond the restrictions of time. In the fourth book Harry develops a will-power greater than Voldemorts and so this signifies his liberation on the mental plane. >From my reading of the Alchemical Wedding I know that books 5, 6 and 7 must deal with the liberation of the mental ego, the emotional ego, and the consciousness ego respectively. In April I published my prediction on Internet, and to my great joy I saw on June 21 that book 5 does indeed deal with Harrys liberation on the plane of the mental ego. The power of Voldemort (Lucifer) is driven out of Harrys mind through the power of Love. As I read and re-read the books it all started to fall into place. Harry, as the new Soul born in the heart (GODrics hollow place) meets Hermione, the new Mind. Ron is the earthly personality that must be prepared to sacrifice itself as Ron did in the chess game. Dumbledore, like the Very Ancient One in the Tower of Olympus (Alchemical Wedding), is the Spirit of Liberation. His phoenix indicates that the Path of Liberation is actually the resurrection of the Original Divine Human Being asleep in the heart, just like Briar-Rose. If the new Soul is loyal to the Spirit of Liberation his phoenix will bring the sword of God. In my study of the Path of Liberation I learned that the alchemical / Rosicrucian traditions teach a set of self-initiations which are named after seven planets in the solar system. I saw 5 of them in Harrys epic journey: Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn. Perhaps you intend to bring Uranus and Neptune in later. Mercury is the name of the new consciousness given to the candidate on the Path when the new soul awakes. I looked up Hermione in the dictionary and it told me Hermione is the female form of Hermes, the Greek equivalent of Mercury. I was thunderstruck when I read that. The Venus initiation is something Harry has only just started in book 5. This is obviously divine Love. On the fifth day of the Alchemical Wedding Christian Rosencreutz comes to a room that is always locked. However just for once the room is unlocked and he goes in. He sees a golden fountain extremely reminiscent of the one in the atrium of the Ministry of Magic and then sees the naked Lady Venus lying asleep. This is obviously the same room as the locked room Harry cant open. I believe that in book 6 Harry will open the room and enter it. Just like Christian Rosencreutz he will see Love and be punished by becoming a gate-keeper (and yet returning Home). This of course refers to the act of compassion that a liberated human being has for those left behind in the Vale of Suffering. This opening of the room of Love will tie in seamlessly with the liberation on the plane of the emotional ego. Harrys heart will be free and filled with Love for ever. The Mars initiation is something Harry achieved through his defeat by will-power of Lucifer in book 4. In my April post on Internet I also predicted the Jupiter initiation. This came along in the brilliant description of Harrys acceptance of the leadership of Dumbledores Army. The Gate of Saturn was introduced in book 5. It is obviously the archway with the veil. In accordance with the teachings of the Path of Liberation, and especially the Alchemical Wedding, I believe Harry will pass through the Gate of Saturn not to die the ordinary death of us who are shackled to the wheel of reincarnation, but the death of total self-sacrifice, resulting in the resurrection of the Son of God in an imperishable and indestructible body of glorious majesty. After reading the prophecy I felt a tinge of recognition. I picked up The Voice of the Silence by HP Blavatsky and found verse 56: "The Self of matter and the SELF of Spirit can never meet. One of the twain must disappear; there is no place for both." I feel that this is the key to understanding the prophecy. Harry will not kill Voldemort. The divine soul does not fight. It always withdraws from conflict and radiates Love to take its place. Evil always destroys itself in the presence of Love, and that is what Voldemort will do. And Harry will liberate his consciousness ego, thus entering the universal, omniscient, multidimensional, and divine consciousness. He will come Home, but his compassion for humanity will make him work for its redemption until the last fallen soul has returned to the Fathers arms. I strongly believe that your work will radically change the future of humanity. I can see a great likelihood that a new religion will form as a result of the power that emanates from your work. The founder of the Anthroposophical movement, Dr Rudolf Steiner, said that from the beginning of this millennium all the worlds religions would become united under the banner of Christian Rosencreutz. I seriously suspect Harry Potter is the new Christian Rosencreutz. Your books are a window on the Path of Resurrection. One day a door will open so that people will actually be able to follow Harry on the Path. I have no idea when or how this will happen, but I believe with all my heart that it will. The window you are creating fills me with so much happiness and rapture that I cant express it. It almost makes me jump and shout for joy. No letter, no words, nothing, can express the debt of gratitude the world owes you. With the utmost sincerity and respect, Hans Rieuwers Haarlem Netherlands ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk ________________________________________________________________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 1 08:13:37 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 08:13:37 -0000 Subject: The Dead Are Not Gone, They're Just Hiding. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83936 There have been endless discussion about whether Sirius is dead and whether or not, even if dead, he will come back. There are those in the camp who say he's dead and that's that. He gone, so get over it. Other say, 'Yeh, but...'. I say, the fact that he is totally completely and irrevocably dead will not stop him from entering the story again. Harry's parents are dead, yet how many times have they entered the story so far. Not just mentioned in passing, but actually established a presents. Harry sees them in his photo album, he sees them in the Mirror, he sees them in the picture Moody shows him, they appear in flashbacks, and in the pensive. Dead as as doornail, yet they still appear. I think in that same sense, we will see Sirius again, I don't think his part of the story is done. It may be in the form of more information that gives us a deeper understanding of the man. For example, if Sirius turned out to be a Slytherin, that might lay the ground work for Harry to realize that not all Slytherins are bad, and that perhaps, he can truly find some allies there. Perhaps he will return in a flashback; in the recolections of a living person. Perhaps in a pensive scene. At the moment I am strongly leaning toward Sirius speaking to Harry from beyond The Veil. That is Harry returns to the Death Chamber, pulls back the curtain, and has a short conversation with Sirius. The nature of that conversation, you might ask? Perhaps, Harry feels it is better to abondon the 'moral coil' and find freedom from life's torment by joining his parents, so he returns to the Death Chamber. There, behind The Veil, he finds Sirius, who convinces him that life is too precious, with too much potential for love and joy to be abandon because it's gotten a little hard. This could be the heart-to-heart that would have made Sirius's death more meaningful, and as odd as it is to say, more satisfying. I'm not saying that will happen, I'm just pointing to a logical ways in which Sirius could be completely and irreversably dead, and yet still appear in the next two books. Just a thought. bboy_mn From oneel at yahoo.com Sat Nov 1 02:51:08 2003 From: oneel at yahoo.com (Tania Canedo) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 02:51:08 -0000 Subject: Mr Potter, he dead. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83937 Fran: > Hmmm, in the US edition, I dont think an inscription is given. To me > this is like a prelude to to how Harry was feeling when LV was inside > him. Imho, I think Harry finds death as a way to ease his pain, not > beautiful. The question to me is why were Harry, Neville, Luna and > Ginny attracted to the veil. Is the veils attraction the reason why > it is in the DOM, as it is something the lures people to their death? Maybe they were drawn to the veil because they are the ones that were in neardeath experience or have seen someone die. And are the ones that, in a way, had to accept death. Harry, Neville and Luna all of them saw someone die, and Ginny was about to die in COS, before Harry went down and save her from Tom Riddle. Tania From ladypensieve at yahoo.com Sat Nov 1 04:37:19 2003 From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 04:37:19 -0000 Subject: Harry's behavior was Re: Riddle's information re: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83938 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > Jen: Harry learns by experience, not by words; when he feels, he > acts. Telling him everything sounds good in theory, but the outcome could have been disastrous as well. Dumbledore says: "You see...I believed it could not be long before Voldemort attempted to force his way into your mind, to manipulate and misdirect your > thoughts....I feared the uses to which he would put you, the > possibility he might try and possess you, Harry." (OOTP, US > hardcover, chap. 37, pgs. 827-828). and... >>Now, I think Harry is too hard on himself here, mistakes were made all around and Dumbledore is right to shoulder the blame. But the bottom line is, telling Harry "everything" at the beginning of the year would not have guaranteed anyone safety, especially Harry.<< Kathy----------There's got to be much more here than meets the eye. Dumbledore is still holding out. Telling Harry anything in the beginning would have been a disaster - because it's through Harry that they have an idea of what's going on with the dark lord. Much more important that V thinks they aren't aware of this connection until the last possible moment.------------ > "It was his fault Sirius had died; it was all his fault. If he, Harry, has not been stupid enough to fall for Voldemort's trick...if he had only opened his mind to the possibility that Voldemort was, as Hermione had said, banking on Harry's *love of playing the hero*..." (OOTP, chap. 37, p. 821). > Kathy------- It's not Harry's fault. I believe Kreacher fed Sirius that plant that Harry was reading about (and falling asleep over). In the beginning of the book, Sirius wasn't that rash - it's only later...after they hadn't seen Kreacher for awhile and wondered where the house elf had gone to (around the Christmas holidays)- when he shows up in a much more pleasant mood... This mood is probably activated by his knowing he'll be helping get rid of Sirius. Now - that gives Sirius an excuse for his arguing with Snape and being childish, but it sure doesn't give Snape any excuse for being as childish as he was...duh!------------- > Dumbledore, while not Harry's parent, is in the unenviable position of being the person *chosen* to hear the Prophecy (yes, the Prophecy could be a red herring as you mentioned, but Dumbledore appears to believe it's important and this belief underlies his relationship with Harry). > Kathy---------It's either a red herring or will be explained away later on when it's not quite as direct as we're led to believe. Again, there's no year attached to this prophecy...anyone born at the end of July could be THE one...or not. >> Dunmbledore knows he failed Harry, "For I see now that what I have done, and not done, with regard to you, bears all the hallmarks of the failings of age." (OOTP, chap. 37, p. 826). This time I think > Dumbledore is being too hard on himself, Kathy----------Again - I think this is still a bit of a show for Voldemort and not completely for Harry's sake. It's the best Dumbledore can do while he worries about how much is still being 'given' to "Tom". Bet Harry studies his Occlumency now! From schwenck20 at eudoramail.com Sat Nov 1 06:28:17 2003 From: schwenck20 at eudoramail.com (godforharry) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 06:28:17 -0000 Subject: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83939 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, eloiseherisson at a... wrote: > > > 12) Why does JKR make the point that Snape never eats at the > house? Laura: > This question raised in my head the extremely unlikely image of our > dear Sevvie joining his beloved friends in the Order at the family > table. Yeah, right. Can you see Snape consenting to take a meal > with the likes of Mundungus and Tonks? That is, assuming he could > get past the idea of sharing quality time with Remus and Sirius. > Snape probably thinks that Molly is an airhead and Arthur is a > wuss. And he and Mad-Eye have a little history too. > > I assume JKR put that little detail in to continue to raise doubts > about Snape's true loyalty to the Order and to further illustrate > his elusive charm. It's a recurring plot device in old novels that he who is plotting revenge on someone never breaks bread in that person's house. Indeed, even if two men are simply enemies, they are not to have a meal together. That is reserved for a man's companions ("com" ("with")) + ("panos" ("bread")). This point is made in novels as various as Dumas pere's *The Count of Monte Cristo* and Zane Grey's *Riders of the Purple Sage*. If Snape _is_ plotting revenge against Sirius, or against the entire Order, he might not want to break bread with the Order in Sirius's house. If, on the other hand, Snape is on the side of the angels, but is trying to convince Voldemort that he's a loyal Death Eater, then the refusal to break bread at Grimmauld Place is a good way to show Voldemort how bent on revenge against the Order he is. Voldemort will get to know of Snape's fasts, of course. He has his sources of information... ________________________________________________________________ Hey, I've finally delurked! It feels good. From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Sat Nov 1 14:35:48 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 14:35:48 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83940 > > > Paula now: > > > > > > Laura, why do you say Molly is way out of line? > > > > Laura: > > > > When she made that crack to Sirius about his not being a > responsible godfather because he spent 12 years in Azkaban, I > lost my patience with her. She treats them [the kids]all > like they were 4 years old, including anyone she decides to treat > as her kid, i.e., Harry and Hermione. (Remember in GoF when > she started being snotty to Hermione because of the story Rita > wrote about Harry, Hermione and Viktor? That was just wrong.) > << > Pippin: > First place, Molly never says that Sirius was an irresponsible > godfather. She says he's been known to act rashly, and everyone > knows this is true. Sirius himself doesn't deny it. In fact, he > knows that it was a rash act of his that led to his being > imprisoned in Azkaban, and that's why Molly's taunt has so much > sting to it. > Laua replies: Yes, she does. She puts it out there clearly by implication and only retracts it when Sirius calls her on it. She says Harry is still a child "and adults reponsible for you should not forget it". (OoP p.89 US)Her meaning is unmistakeable. And Sirius never agrees that he acted rashly. He just says "[w]e'll leave my instructions from Dumbledore out of this, if you don't mind!". (OoP p. 89 US) As for whether Sirius's change of secret keeper was rash or not, I'd say that's a matter of debate on this list. I don't think it was. Everyone knew there was a spy in the Order, Sirius knew it wasn't himself and no one, including DD, suspected Peter. Sirius made the best decision he could with the information he had. Some people have argued that James and Lily should have chosen DD to be their secret keeper. Maybe, maybe not, but that wasn't Sirius's decision. You may think it was rash of Sirius to set himself up as LV's target while taking steps to insure that the real secret keeper wouldn't be found. I don't. > Pippin: > I'm not sure I understand what the Skeeter episode has to do > with treating people like they're four years old. Molly was misled by Rita Skeeter, but who was to tell her things were otherwise? You think Ron wrote home and said, "Harry's all upset because the Prophet made Hermione out to be a scarlet woman and > Harry doesn't like her that way at all?" Laura replies: Molly acts like the kids can't work out their relationships on their own; she has to get involved and make her feelings part of the situation. (Remember the little Easter egg she sent Hermione? I mean, really.) That's inappropriate here, imo. No, I don't think Ron wrote home at all, and that's exactly the point. No one asked Molly for her input. Her job was to stay out of it unless and until she was explicitly invited in by one of the participants. What teenager wants mommy to show up and start "solving" their personal problems? And there weren't any problems to begin with. Anyone who would take Rita at her word is a fool. Molly should know that-everyone else seems to. Remember, this is a woman who is still badgering her grown son about his hair length. Enough already! > Laura: > > By the time we get to OoP, she has decided that she can > ignore the wishes of Harry's parents and insert herself in loco > parentis to Harry. Why? > Pippin: > Um, because Dumbledore asked her to? Because Harry's been > writing Ron for a month asking when he can come to the > Burrow? Molly put her own family at risk, first by giving Harry > refuge from the Dursleys and then involving herself in the Order. > Then Sirius said she didn't have any rights in Harry. That was > pretty unfeeling of him. Laura replies: Show me the canon for your belief that DD asked Molly to take on legal responsibility for Harry. Yes, Molly and Arthur have been generous and loving to Harry. That doesn't mean that they have formal responsibility for him or that they have any "rights" in him. If you care about your kid's friends and offer them affection and support, does that mean you then have "rights" over them? Of course not. Sirius was exactly correct. Molly was overstepping her bounds. Pippin: > Especially when she'd spent the last month cleaning up *his* > house, with out much help from him, apparently. Laura replies: Now that, I assume, was on DD's instruction, so that the Order HQ would be safe and habitable. Do you really think Sirius cared whether the place crumbled in a heap around him? He would have been delighted. I'd guess that most prisoners don't savor the experience of having to scrub out their cells. Pippin: Of course Molly's a little nuts by the time we see her in OOP. > She's been fretting about Harry for a month and no happier > about his being stuck at the Dursleys than he was. And she > doesn't know why any more than Harry does. But she's the suck > it up and deal type. She's trying to cope by putting the danger out of mind and assuring herself that Dumbledore knows best. > > But she has to put up with Sirius grumbling about Dumbledore > all the time not to mention whatever wild talk Sirius indulged in. Probably hatching one halfbaked scheme after another to spring > Harry from the Dursleys without Dumbledore's permission or lam it with him from the Ministry ditto. Laura replies: I think we have a different perspective on this and we'll have to agree to disagree. Molly is ready to indulge in a scene at the drop of a rubber wand, all the way through canon. Her default reaction seems to be a meltdown. It's getting old for me. I would doubt that Sirius spent a lot of time talking to Molly. It sounded from canon like he hung out with Buckbeak a fair amount. If Remus was around, I imagine Sirius talked to him. Molly shows absolutely no insight into Sirius, or anyone, really. She just wants to be Uber-Mom, who knows best without bothering to ask anyone what they might want or feel. Laura: > It's not like Harry went to Molly for advice at any point throughout the 5 books. > Pippin: > And that had to hurt. Laura replies: No one *ever* goes to Molly for advice. In the kitchen scene at GP, everyone in the room, including her own husband, disagrees with her. That should tell us something. Here's the canon on that discusion: "'He's not your son', said Sirius quietly. 'He's as good as,' said Mrs. Weasley fiercely. Who else has he got?' 'He's got me!' 'Yes,' said Mrs. Weasley, her lip curling. The thing is, it's been rather difficult for you to look after him while you've been locked up in Azkaban, hasn't it?'" (OoP p. 90 US) My reaction to that was to gasp-what an incredibly cruel and hurtful thing to say! She accuses Sirius of confusing Harry with James. Yet she confuses 15-year-old!Harry with a much younger Harry she never even knew. She doesn't do any of the kids a service by refusing to let them grow up just because the big world can be scary. Guess what-it'll be that way whether kids are equipped to handle it or not. Wouldn't a thoughtful parent want them to be prepared for what they may face as teens and adults? I thought that was what parenting was all about. From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Sat Nov 1 14:40:55 2003 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 14:40:55 -0000 Subject: Harry's behavior was Re: Riddle's information re: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83941 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > > If Harry's not still furious with DD in book 6, I'll be mightily > surprised. I still think that the prophecy is a great big old red > herring. I haven't yet read a compelling explanation for why LV had > to be kept from knowing what it said. Trying to keep Voldy from learning the prophecy's content does make sense in terms of a diversionary tactic. Although it seems that the prophecy actually contained little or nothing Voldy didn't already know (or at least logically deduced), he of course could not have known that the prophecy would prove so uninformative. Therefore, it is an excellent strategic move, as Dumbledore scrambles to pull together an anti-DE coalition, to get Voldy to squander valuable time and resources into obtaining access to information that will do him little good. - CMC From entropymail at yahoo.com Sat Nov 1 14:52:51 2003 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 14:52:51 -0000 Subject: Droobles' Anagram (Yet Again) -- GOLD BRIBE In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83942 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tigerpatronus" wrote: > Was flipping around MuggleNet the other day, bored at work, when I > noticed they had posted the anagram GOLD BRIBE BELOW ST. MUNGO'S for > the DROOBLE'S BEST BLOWING GUM mystery. Don't forget that the group took the subway (that's right! below!) on one of their trips to visit Arthur while he was recuperating in St. Mungo's. They stopped quite close by the building. And, the hospital's directory only lists floors beginning at ground level. Surely there must be at least one basement (yes, below again!) to a building this large. Perhaps sub-basements! yippee! :: Entropy :: From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Sat Nov 1 18:00:56 2003 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 18:00:56 -0000 Subject: From This Day On (filk) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83943 The 14th "Azkaboon" song: >From This Day On (PoA, Chap. 11) To the tune of the same name from Brigadoon Hear a MIDI at: http://www.hamienet.com/cat228.html THE SCENE: Since overhearing the role that Black played in his parents' death, HARRY is obsessed with thoughts of revenge. HERMIONE & RON express concern. HERMIONE & RON: Dinna ye know, Harry, that yer eyes are puffed and red? So you need to go, Harry, and get some sleep in your bed HARRY: The folks I never knew were slew due to You-Know-Who I've an orphan been from that day on And some guy my folks called friend gave them a most bitter end And it's my godkin who made them gone. One dozen years I've been of parents deprived Black sentenced me to that pure hell: Privet Drive. So though I may be too late I vow to retaliate `Gainst him! Against Black so dark and dim! I pledge it's tit-for-tat for that double-crossing rat Tis Black I'll pursue from this day on! - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 1 18:06:04 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 18:06:04 -0000 Subject: The VEIL and The Weasleys Not @ MOM In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83944 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "confusinglyso" [Phil] wrote: > Summing up, my theory is that the veil has a magical third dimension > allowing Sirius to disappear. As in my earlier post, I still beleive > that Mr & Mrs Weasley and Bill are waiting (below ?) for Sirius. I just don't get it. WHY, then, would JKR have been reduced to tears after writing Sirius' death scene? She talked a lot in interviews about how painful it was to write and about how she walked into the kitchen afterwards in tears. I do not believe she would have described all of that emotion if, in fact, Sirius only just "disappeared". Do people really think JKR is pulling our leg to that degree? Siriusly Snapey Susan From deemarie1a at yahoo.com Sat Nov 1 18:24:16 2003 From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 18:24:16 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83945 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > > Laura replies: > > No one *ever* goes to Molly for advice. In the kitchen scene at GP, > everyone in the room, including her own husband, disagrees with > her. That should tell us something. > > > Here's the canon on that discusion: > > "'He's not your son', said Sirius quietly. > 'He's as good as,' said Mrs. Weasley fiercely. Who else has he got?' > 'He's got me!' > 'Yes,' said Mrs. Weasley, her lip curling. The thing is, it's been > rather difficult for you to look after him while you've been locked > up in Azkaban, hasn't it?'" (OoP p. 90 US) > > My reaction to that was to gasp-what an incredibly cruel and hurtful > thing to say! She accuses Sirius of confusing Harry with James. > Yet she confuses 15-year-old!Harry with a much younger Harry she > never even knew. She doesn't do any of the kids a service by > refusing to let them grow up just because the big world can be > scary. Guess what-it'll be that way whether kids are equipped to > handle it or not. Wouldn't a thoughtful parent want them to be > prepared for what they may face as teens and adults? I thought that > was what parenting was all about. Yes, I agree, that was an incredibly hurtful thing to say. But don't we all say things like that in the heat of an argument? Under normal circumstances, I don't think that Molly would be that cruel. Yes, a parent's job to to prepare their children for the world. But Molly has been and I suspect will always be an overprotective mother. Her motivation for this behavior is not controlling but loving. I see many of Molly's qualities in myself. I am a single parent of a 17 year old girl and an 9 year old boy. My desire to protect them from the harsh realities of life tend to make me overprotective not from a desire to control them but because I love them and don't want to see them hurt in any way. Molly knows only the tragic Harry. I am sure she has heard Ron talk about Harry and how he is treated by the Muggles. And she certainly knows about the trio's adventures at Hogwarts. And don't forget, this is the boy who saved her only daughter at the risk of his own life. So, for all intents and purposes, this boy has become, for her, another son. She extends the same motherly feelings for her own children to Harry. She is overprotective of all of her charges. And she certainly considers Harry part of her family. I suspect all the Weasley's do with the exception of Percy. Of course, I could be wrong... D From pjcousins at btinternet.com Sat Nov 1 19:46:58 2003 From: pjcousins at btinternet.com (confusinglyso) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 19:46:58 -0000 Subject: The VEIL and The Weasleys Not @ MOM Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83946 (confusinglyso) Phil wrote: > Summing up, my theory is that the veil has a magical third > dimension allowing Sirius to disappear. As in my earlier post, > Post Number #83373 I still beleive that Mr & Mrs Weasley and Bill > are waiting (below ?) for Sirius. Remember Harry thinks he hears > Ron below (page 683 UK edition, Department of Mysteries, > "Is that you, Ron?" ***Important Clue*** Siriusly Snapey Susan responded: > I just don't get it. WHY, then, would JKR have been reduced to > tears after writing Sirius' death scene? She talked a lot in > interviews about how painful it was to write and about how she > walked into the kitchen afterwards in tears. I do not believe she > would have described all of that emotion if, in fact, Sirius only > just "disappeared". > Do people really think JKR is pulling our leg to that degree? (confusinglyso) Phil replying After a death, distress and broken hearts belong only to those who mourn. I do not know whether Sirius is dead or not, (just from the book, I do not think anyone can be certain either way). JKR may or may not mislead with interviews, but should such interviews influence the reader's interpretation of the story? My interpretation of JKR's distress is the effect Sirius' death (or disappearance) is to have on Harry. (and it must have this severe effect for him to banish LV when LV takes over Harry during the DD battle). Harry seems the only person to really mourn Sirius, all the adults appear almost indifferent, Neville is sorry, Ron and Hermione can not speak about it. In the first scene in the "death" chamber Harry thinks Ron is 'in' the Veil, hence most of my main post #83373. Also in that post I asked where the fixation that the Veil = Death originated from ? Is this an assumption from other stories or legends or is there real canon to support Veil = Death ? Phil(istine) From mail at chartfield.net Sat Nov 1 19:53:05 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 19:53:05 -0000 Subject: further confirmation that Hogwarts is in Scotland In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83947 Talking about the location of Hogwarts, Geoff wrote: > If you draw a line from the Norfolk area to Peebles and extrapolate it at its northern end, you are heading into the West Highlands. Certainly in the film, one of the well known locations was the Glenfinnan viaduct which is on the West Highland line from Fort William to Mallaig. Now Astrofiammante: I had cause to be wondering about locations too the other day - I was exercised about where Sirius might have washed ashore when swimming back from Azkaban, and was peering at a map of Scotland. And I thought what a great location Rannoch Moor would be for Hogwarts. It's under the Grampians, so seeing mountains in the distance would be no problem. It fits the conventional wisdom of Hogwarts being 'closer to Aberdeen than to Edinburgh'. There's a railway line - the West Highland Line - running across it. And then there's this paragraph from GoF (Bloomsbury p/b p. 148): "'It's bewitched,' said Hermione. 'If a Muggle looks at it, all they see is a mouldering old ruin with a sign over the entrance saying DO NOT ENTER, UNSAFE.'" I would suggest that even with this precaution in place, hiding that mouldering old ruin in a wide swathe of inhospitable countryside is going to help a lot. Apparently Rannoch Moor is famous for its 'big weather' and we certainly see plenty of that at Hogwarts... So that's my best guess. Regarding Sirius, obviously it's total speculation because there's not the canon to support it, but it did occur to me that the puir wee doggie could have done an awful lot worse than wash ashore on Fraserburgh beach - that's if he didn't find himself in the Orkneys. Astrofiammante www.deadjournal.com/users/astrofiammante From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 1 20:08:25 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 20:08:25 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83948 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > As for whether Sirius's change of secret keeper was rash or not, I'd say that's a matter of debate on this list.< True. But I was referring to Sirius's decision to go after Pettigrew with no backup. To quote Arthur in PoA, "Nobody but trained Hit Wizards from the Magical Law Enforcement Squad would have stood a chance against [a known Death Eater] once he was cornered." And Arthur was talking to Hagrid, who as we've discovered, is pretty formidable in a fight. Laura: > Anyone who would take Rita at her word is a fool. Molly should know that-everyone else seems to.< Then I guess Hermione is a fool, since she called on Rita to spread the word about Voldemort's return. Hermione could have written the story herself, so I guess Hermione understands that the Skeeter byline commands a lot of respect, despite Rita's tendency to, er, exaggerate. Anyway, Hermione is sad about the tiny egg, not angry at Molly. She *wants* to be friends with Molly. It was just a stupid misunderstanding, like Ron thinking that Harry had put his name in the goblet. Laura: > Remember, this is a woman who is still badgering her grown son about his hair length. Enough already!<< Aww. I thought that was kind of sweet actually. Bill doesn't seem terribly bothered by it. He knows it's just her way of showing she cares. > Laura: > > Show me the canon for your belief that DD asked Molly to take >on legal responsibility for Harry. << Moral, not legal. Dumbledore, chapter 36, GoF. "Molly...am I right in thinking I can count on you and Arthur?" And of course, he invites Molly to Harry's bedside, along with Sirius, and meets with her before she goes home. I think Sirius's remark, "He's not your son," was just as hurtful as Molly's crack about Azkaban. For both Sirius and Molly, their moral right to care for Harry is stronger than their legal one. They're both aware of that. It's a case of the pot calling the kettle black, since Harry's *legal* guardians are the Dursleys. > Laura replies: > > I think we have a different perspective on this and we'll have to > agree to disagree. Molly is ready to indulge in a scene at the >drop of a rubber wand, all the way through canon. And Sirius isn't? Pippin From mail at chartfield.net Sat Nov 1 20:13:39 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 20:13:39 -0000 Subject: Wizard government (was wizards and the queen) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83949 lola says: > why then has the magical Prime Minister not been mentioned? And why does Fudge have the title Minister of Magic, which gives him power over all magical affairs? Now Astrofiammante: Something has struck me before about the system of government in the magical world, of which this thread reminded me. In the UK, and probably everywhere else with a similar system of government, for the protection of democracy and other essential stuff, government is supposed to be divided into three distinct branches: Legislature (parliament; lawmakers) Executive (government; prime minister, cabinet) Judiciary (court system; judges) Each of these three branches should act as a check and balance on the others - for example people have access to the courts to challenge laws they think unjust. Without straying too far into politics, an issue people have with the present UK government (and probably the US one) is that it is upsetting this natural distinction and that the executive currently has too much influence over the legislature and the judiciary. In the magical world, we've seen plenty about the executive - the Ministry of Magic is a big sprawling beast with practically unlimited influence. We've seen a little of the judiciary in the form of the Wizengamot. Doesn't it strike you how dominated it is by the executive? Amelia Bones is a 'good guy' in OotP, but she is an official. Fudge, Umbridge - officials. And this is nothing new - Barty Crouch, an official, was able to send Sirius Black to Azkaban without a trial. And have we seen anything of the legislature? Could it be one of the 'grand council of wizard' bodies to which Dumbledore belongs? Or has anyone got any better suggestions? In any case, it hardly strikes me as a dominant feature of wizard government. Who is originating the laws? Fudge? In which case he's more or less a dictator, benevolent or otherwise. So we have a system depicted where the executive - the Ministry of Magic - has none of the checks and balances operating on it that should be there, if we want to draw parallels with our own Muggle world. And we've seen some of the problems this can cause - when the Ministry starts acting beyond its powers - Umbridge's behaviour at Hogwarts and by sending the Dementors to Little Whinging, Fudge's outrageous attempts to convict Harry wrongly of illegally using magic, the lack of a completely free press in the form of a Daily Prophet that can be unduly influenced by the Ministry. To return to Lola's point at the top of this post, cabinet government is supposed to provide another set of checks and balances. The Prime Minister is merely 'first among equals' and decisions are collective. If Fudge is operating in an ambiguous relationship to the 'Muggle cabinet', than that's another set of checks and balances on his behaviour gone. For goodness' sake, the man's more or less being invited to misbehave himself. I think all this is just another of many examples of how wizarding society is badly out of kilter, and will need to be reformed before the end of the series - if another Evil Overlord isn't to happen by and upset everything all over again... Astrofiammante www.deadjournal.com/users/astrofiammante From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 1 19:53:20 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 19:53:20 -0000 Subject: Mr Potter, he dead/LV and Hallowe'en In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83950 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "maneelyfh" wrote: Kirstini: > > >> Incidentally, on the archway, I found this nifty little quote > that > > must have slipped my eyes on first to third OoP > readings: "...Harry > > thought the archway had a kind of beauty about it, old > > though it was. The gently rippling veil intriguied him; he felt a > > very strong inclination to climb up on the dais and walk through > > it." > > OoP (Bloomsbury), p682. > > Who's "half in love with easeful death" now? I think that's > > foregrounding.>> Fran: > Hmmm, in the US edition, I dont think an inscription is given. To me > this is like a prelude to to how Harry was feeling when LV was inside > him. Imho, I think Harry finds death as a way to ease his pain, not > beautiful. The question to me is why were Harry, Neville, Luna and > Ginny attracted to the veil. Is the veils attraction the reason why > it is in the DOM, as it is something the lures people to their death? Geoff: I think there is a misunderstanding here. There was no inscription on the archway. When Kirstini wrote, "Incidentally, on the archway, I found this nifty little quote..." what was being said was: "Incidentally, whil on the subject of the archway, I found this nifty little quote....." ****** On a totally different topic, a thought came to me yesterday. Hallowe'en is considered to be a time when the living dead, witches and demons come out and are abroad for that one night in the year. Is there anything interesting in the fact that Voldemort tried to kill Harry and lost his powers and bodily form on Hallowe'en itself - that the most evil wizard came unstuck on the evening which was supposes to favour him and his like? Geoff From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 1 20:33:43 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 20:33:43 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited (WAS: Who Will Betray the Order? In-Reply-To: <011a01c39ed5$106b5c80$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83951 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb" wrote: > Debbie scans the empty shores of Theory Bay. The summer tourists have gone, and Kirstini's souvenir shack sits deserted. Debbie spies an old newspaper scrap caught in a crevice and pulls it out. The headline reads, "Who Will Betray the Order?" The article, signed by Pippin, states: > > We are looking for someone who is supposed to be > > nice, and close enough to Harry for him to take the betrayal > > personally. I'd say the candidates are: Dumbledore, Hagrid, > > Hermione, Lupin, Molly and Ron. Any others? Most of you know > > which one I'd pick. > > Wait a minute, Debbie thinks. Where's McGonagall on that list? She's supposed to be nice. She should be considered *close* to Harry - she's his Head of House, and she's cut him a few breaks over the years. Debbie draws a deep breath and shouts, "Elkins!" No response. "Elkins! Are you here?" Still no response. "Elkins! They've forgotten EverSoEvil!McGonagall!" > > There is no sound in Theory Bay except the wind and the waves lapping the shoreline. Debbie spies a scaffold near the souvenir stand, undoubtedly used to execute discredited theories, and quickly climbs on the landing. She clears her throat and begins to speak loudly. > > < > > I go back to Elkins' brilliant analysis of ESE McGonagall. > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39470 > > I submit there's nothing in OOP that resolves the questions Elkins raised. "Oh yes, there is," says a voice, quietly. Debbie jumps and nearly falls off her scaffold. A figure in cape and dark glasses has somehow appeared right next to her. "Yipes!" says Debbie. "How do you *do* that?" "Never you mind," says Pippin, mysteriously. "But you were speaking of Ever-so-evil McGonagall. I submit there is indeed evidence in OOP to discredit Elkins' theory. I draw your attention to Chapter 30, OOP. --- Indeed, a week after Fred and George's departure Harry witnessed Professor McGonagall walking right past Peeves, who was determinedly loosening a crystal chandelier, and could have sworn he heard her tell the poltergeist out of the corner of her mouth, "It unscrews the other way." ----- I submit that no evil character in Rowling ever gets off a good line. Indeed, the principal difference between Impostor!Madeye and the real Moody is that the *real* Moody is funny. Same with memory-wiped "haven't got a sword" Gilderoy versus his former self. Pippin who can't remember that Lupin has ever said anything funny From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com Sat Nov 1 21:24:28 2003 From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 21:24:28 -0000 Subject: No Sex, Please, We're British In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83952 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "grannybat84112" wrote: > > > Jeff debated Caipora on the methods of Magical contraception: > > > > > > > Rubber is too much of a muggle > > > > invention for them to use, imho. But I could be wrong. > > > > > > What do you think they use for birth control, then? > > > > > > Ye old English methods, the lunar cycle, or even a spell. You > > don't see any mentioning of condom dispensors in the boy's loo, do > > you? :) > > > Well, we wouldn't. JKR hasn't given us even a glimpse into that > particular bastion of male privacy. The closest she's allowed us is > the Quidditch changing rooms. (No, I don't think the prefect's bath > counts. That room struck me as a unisex facility.) > Jeff: So true. I can imagine the first time that Harry went into the changing rooms with all those older boys it was one of those occasions that he wished he had his invisibility cloak. :) Also Harry might not notice the dispensors even if they're there. :) Besides, I think the Twins have some in their trunks. I don't even want to imagine what kind of charms they might place on them! I agree that the Prefects bath might be unisex. There didn't appear to be any mention of different facilities nor privacy screens or walls, so I'm guessing that a spell prevents co-ed usage. > Regarding the larger question?what's to keep them from employing the > Magical form of The Pill? The Weasley Twins use "double-ended, color- > coded chews" in their Skiving Snackboxes, so the Magical world > doesn't have to rely on just potions and unguents for medicinal > delivery systems. The Pill is a product of organic chemistry. > Potion making is essentially organic chemistry. > > I have to side with Jeff on this one. Mechanical methods are just > so...Muggle. > Jeff: Thanks. I agree with your assesment. There's no reason to suspect that they might not have their own pills, or maybe still use sheep intestines as they did in the old days, but since I can't be sure that they coaches have rubber wheels, to use a fairly new invention such as a rubber condom, might not be something they'd want to use. Jeff From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Sat Nov 1 21:36:13 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 21:36:13 -0000 Subject: Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83953 > Gorda: >It raises the question about Godric's Hollow: presumably Peter had > told Sirius where to find the Potters, because when he finds >Peter's place empty he gets a bad feeling and goes looking for the >Potters. Then KathyK: > Just some random comments on who I think was told. Sirius >obviously knew. It was his idea to change to Peter, he was keeping >and eye on Peter, and Sirius and James would have wanted Sirius to >be in the know. Besides, if Peter didn't tell Sirius, it would >have drawn suspicion to him. Now me: I may just be being dense here [that has certainly happened here before!], but I thought the whole reason for Sirius's suggesting Peter as SecretKeeper was that he [Sirius] DIDN'T want to be in the know. He'd said he would have been too obvious a choice for that, right? So if Peter told Sirius *anyway*, then what's the point of using Peter? Or are you both talking about Peter telling Sirius *after* the murders took place? Siriusly Snapey Susan From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 1 22:00:19 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 22:00:19 -0000 Subject: Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83954 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > > Gorda: > >It raises the question about Godric's Hollow: presumably Peter had > > told Sirius where to find the Potters, because when he finds > >Peter's place empty he gets a bad feeling and goes looking for the > >Potters. > > Then KathyK: > > Just some random comments on who I think was told. Sirius obviously knew. It was his idea to change to Peter, he was keeping and eye on Peter, and Sirius and James would have wanted Sirius to be in the know. Besides, if Peter didn't tell Sirius, it would have drawn suspicion to him. > Sirlusly Snapey Susan > Now me: > I may just be being dense here [that has certainly happened here before!], but I thought the whole reason for Sirius's suggesting Peter as SecretKeeper was that he [Sirius] DIDN'T want to be in the know. He'd said he would have been too obvious a choice for that, right? So if Peter told Sirius *anyway*, then what's the point of using Peter? << It seems that people who know the secret, but aren't themselves the secretkeeper, can't reveal it to anybody else. Dumbledore says that because Kreacher is not Secret Keeper for the Order, he can't reveal where the headquarters is. Judging by what Flitwick said, even if Sirius took Voldemort right up to the Potters' window, Voldemort still wouldn't be able to see them, or even realize that they were there. Only Peter could give them away. But once the house was destroyed, it no longer exisited and the spell couldn't hide it anymore. I would guess that Dumbledore and Sirius were both let in on the secret by Peter (though Dumbledore thought it was Sirius), but couldn't themselves reveal it to anyone else. Pippin From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com Sat Nov 1 22:02:31 2003 From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 22:02:31 -0000 Subject: Weasley twins [very interesting idea] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83955 Most interesting! I thought the Twins were just odd, but not *that* odd. :) I guess that could explain the age gap between Charlie and Percy. Maybe Molly was infertile for a while and they used magic and it backfired a bit when the Twins were born? They do seem to be thought of as a curse, more or less by many. Could that be the truth? Were F&G created to be a burden to the Weasley family? Man, all of this is going to change my views on them. I really like them, so this will change things a bit. Also what if they're gay or in an incestous relationship with one another. Would that make them unnatural in the WW? Were they joined at the hip at birth and then seperated, to make this twin-souls-in-one-body seem more truthful? Jeff From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 00:03:29 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 00:03:29 -0000 Subject: confirmation .. Hogwarts is in Scotland - MAPS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83956 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "queen_astrofiammante" wrote: > Talking about the location of Hogwarts, Geoff wrote: > > > If you draw a line from the Norfolk area to Peebles and > > extrapolate it at its northern end, you are heading into the West > Highlands. > > Now Astrofiammante: > > I had cause to be wondering about locations too the other day - I > was exercised about where Sirius might have washed ashore when > swimming back from Azkaban, and was peering at a map of Scotland. > > And I thought what a great location Rannoch Moor would be for > Hogwarts. It's under the Grampians, so seeing mountains in the > distance would be no problem. It fits the conventional wisdom of > Hogwarts being 'closer to Aberdeen than to Edinburgh'. > > ...edited... > > Astrofiammante bboyy_mn: Most of you have seen this already, bus as the subject has come up, I will post it agian. Web link - Location of Peebles relative to nearest UK rail line- http://bluemoonmarket.homestead.com/Files/Hogwarts/UK-Rail1.htm Web Link - Speculative locations of Hogwarts in Northern Scotland. These are satellite image maps of norther Scotland showing rail lines, towns, and road, as well as very good likeness of the geographic features. 5 maps in all. http://bluemoonmarket.homestead.com/Files/Hogwarts/hogwarts1.htm Just passing it along. bboy_mn From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Sun Nov 2 00:32:25 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 00:32:25 -0000 Subject: Between life and death (Re: The Dead Are Not Gone...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83957 Hi, I'd like to add some comments to one of the messages. Bboy_mn wrote: "Perhaps he will return in a flashback; in the recolections of a living person. Perhaps in a pensive scene. At the moment I am strongly leaning toward Sirius speaking to Harry from beyond The Veil. That is Harry returns to the Death Chamber, pulls back the curtain, and has a short conversation with Sirius. The nature of that conversation, you might ask? Perhaps, Harry feels it is better to abondon the 'moral coil' and find freedom from life's torment by joining his parents, so he returns to the Death Chamber. There, behind The Veil, he finds Sirius, who convinces him that life is too precious, with too much potential for love and joy to be abandoned because it's gotten a little hard. This could be the heart-to-heart that would have made Sirius's death more meaningful, and as odd as it is to say, more satisfying. I'm not saying that will happen, I'm just pointing to a logical ways in which Sirius could be completely and irreversibly dead, and yet still appear in the next two books." That would be indeed a very plausible possibility. At the end of Book 5, Harry is overwhelmed with all he learned about himself, with the prophecy. How couldn't he be? It's such a burden. The scene at the end of the book, when he is alone, watching the other students, contains seeds of temptation: why couldn't he be just a normal boy, instead of being "a marked man", as JKR wrote? Why should he accept to play the part destiny wrote for him? It's the parting of the ways. On one hand, the normal destiny, a teen age wizard boy's life, with preoccupations such as girls, OWLs, Quidditch, etc..; on the other hand, a hero's destiny, with a messianic part to play, with a murder or a sacrifice to accept. This is not fantasy; Harry is not playing any role game at all. How couldn't he be overwhelmed, how couldn't he be scared? And how couldn't he wish to escape from all that? The temptation of suicide (let's call things by their proper name) could be a very logical topic in the forthcoming book. As you write it in your message, joining his parents and Sirius beyond the Veil could appear to Harry as a solution to his torments. And the story would be about how he finally accepts his destiny, his mission, and chooses to follow the way of heroes. Laying between life and death could help Harry to make his choice. Yes, the more I think of it, the more it seems plausible. Moreover, I'm sure it would give JKR the occasion to write a new moving psychological portrait of her young gentleman. Now, I'm not sure that Harry would try to commit suicide going beyond the Veil. We can be sure that Dumbledore and Co will manage to keep him far from the Ministry, to keep him from the fascination he fells towards the Chamber of Death. I would buy on an option involving poison and antidotes. Maybe you remember a post I sent last year; it was called "The Seven Ordeals". I wrote that the seven ordeals the kids have to face while they are looking for the Philosopher's Stone in chapter titled "Through the Trapdoor", were metaphors of the seven books of the series. The sixth ordeal deals with potions, poisons, antidotes. Harry managed to pass through the obstacle thanks to Hermione's help. What happens in OotP? We learn that Harry has a huge problem with potions, and that Hermione is a very good potion brewer. I can't explain exactly why, and after all, it's JKR's job to invent the continuation of the story, but I can't help betting that Harry will be poisoned in Book 6, and that Hermione will help him to survive. Will he take poison in order to commit suicide? Will someone (Draco? Snape? Peter? A new villain) try to kill him? Will he take poison accidentally? Will it be part of a plan in order to protect him, making Voldemort believe he's dead? Will he need to "visit death" in order to get an information? There are so many possibilities Concerning Hermione's part in "the poison affair", about her helping Harry to go through that dangerous experience, we have not only the sixth ordeal in PS/SS, but also her Patronus in OotP: it an otter, an animal traditionally presented as a "psychopompe"(sorry, I don't know the English word),ita est , that helps souls to travel through the beyond. Just like Hermione did in the first book, when she helped Harry to cross the walls of fire. By the way: dogs are also traditional psychopompes, and in Egyptian mythology, Sirius is the gate to the beyond. He could be a guide to Harry while he lays between life and death Ok, I must confess that all that stuff is rather complicated. Should I add that, as many members of HPfGU, I would miss Sirius if he didn't come back at all in the series, on a way or another? Amicalement, Iris From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 2 00:35:38 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 00:35:38 -0000 Subject: Harry's behavior was Re: Riddle's information re: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83958 Laura responds: >>I agree that at the end of OoP, Harry seems to have reached a pointof emotional equilibrium. He's been able to cry for Sirius and hasbegun to accept the finality of his death. He has experiencedpublic acts of support from his friends and adult mentors, both onthe train back from school and at the station. So when we meet himagain in book 6 (sooner rather than later, we hope!) we may see a less angry Harry. But... If Harry's not still furious with DD in book 6, I'll be mightily surprised. << Really? Harry isn't a person who finds it hard to forgive. He knows his friends, both young and old, sometimes make mistakes and misjudgements and take too much on themselves. He's not holding it against Hermione, Ron, Hagrid or Lupin for the times they've let him down. Why should he feel differently about Dumbledore? Laura: >>I still think that the prophecy is a great big old red herring. I haven't yet read a compelling explanation for why LV hadto be kept from knowing what it said. << 1) Because Dumbledore was using it as bait to lure LV out of hiding, but that could only work as long as there was *no* other way LV could find out what it said, including the link in Harry's mind. 2) Because Dumbledore didn't want LV to know that if "the one" is not destroyed by LV, then LV himself will not survive. It would appear that LV suspects this. But he can't know. Why erase all doubt? 3) Because Dumbledore didn't want LV to know that according to the Prophecy, Dumbledore will not be able to kill LV. Dumbledore has reason to think that LV will fear him far less if LV finds out for sure that Dumbledore can't kill him. We can see Dumbledore trying to sow the idea in LV's mind that there are worse things than death, but so far LV isn't buying. Laura: >>That's where I think DD made his big miscalculation. Abigail pointed out in a recent post that DD has his skills but managing people isn't among them, at least of late.<< I disagree. What we have in the Order is a standard situation in war stories all the way back to the Iliad: a poorly organized gang of misfits, malcontents and prima donnas up against a better disciplined and highly motivated enemy force. The Order's collection of different outlooks is their great strength. Dumbledore knows his people have to learn to trust each other despite their differences, but it's no good *telling* them that. They have to find out for themselves. Dumbledore can't *make* Snape and Harry work things out, any more than the forced handshake at the end of GoF could fix things between Snape and Sirius. All Dumbledore can do is create opportunities for co-operation and hope for the best. For all his power and influence, Dumbledore can use charisma only up to a point. If people do as he wishes only because they're overwhelmed by his personality, he will sow so much resentment in the end that it will destroy his ability to govern except by force. We can see the end stage of this process in Tom Riddle/Voldemort. Laura: >>The idea that an adult keeps you in ignorance in order to protectyou is not one that kids understand. You have to be an adult to seewhy it might make sense to act that way. Kids want to be respectedand trusted, not infantilized and patronized. And if the grownupswho care for them want them to grow into thinking, responsibleadults, they'll understand that and act accordingly. If the kid isold enough to ask the question, s/he's old enough to hear (at least some of) the answer<< Harry was neither child nor adult in OOP. He had the capabilities of adulthood, but he still had a child's conception of what it means to be grown up. He thought that having proved himself against Voldemort meant he should be let in on everything. In truth, none of the grownups in the Order had been told all of Dumbledore's plans. All of the adults accepted that as members of a secret organization, they were going to be operating with less than full knowledge. Harry was told this also. But he couldn't grasp it. Even after he was told the reason for secrecy, he assumed the reason he wasn't being told everything was that Dumbledore didn't trust him on account of his youth. That wasn't the case. Of course it felt awful being kept in the dark. But either Harry is a kid, and has to accept that right or wrong, adults are going to be making decisions for him, or he's an adult, and shouldn't expect anybody to have nurturing him as their first concern. But Harry wanted it both ways. Pippin From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Sun Nov 2 00:44:27 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 00:44:27 -0000 Subject: Mr Potter, he dead/LV and Hallowe'en In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83959 <<<--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote:...On a totally different topic, a thought came to me yesterday. Hallowe'en is considered to be a time when the living dead, witches and demons come out and are abroad for that one night in the year. Is there anything interesting in the fact that Voldemort tried to kill Harry and lost his powers and bodily form on Hallowe'en itself - that the most evil wizard came unstuck on the evening which was supposes to favour him and his like?>>> The Sergeant Majorette says Maybe the irony is that Voldemort holds the conventional view that dead = demons = witches = a whole continuum of evil stuff; therefore if I'm evil I have the advantage on Halloween. All Hallows (All Saints) Eve is not considered evil in every culture, just maybe the ones that syncretize it with Samhain (sp?). In fact, some cultures celebrate by going to the cemetery with a picnic basket featuring the dead folks' favorite foods and partying with their dearly departed. In NYC where I live, some of the graffiti memorials have the candles lit and fresh flowers and bottles of rum. Point being that, as happened in the magical golden cage match in GoF, the righteous dead can take advantage of any parting of the veil as well as the evil dead; you've got to believe that there are probably more of them anyway. So perhaps Voldemort would have been better off picking a night when only his living enemies were available to oppose him... --JDR From sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 2 00:58:31 2003 From: sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk (sachmet96) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 00:58:31 -0000 Subject: Wizards and the Queen In-Reply-To: <1e7.126e25c1.2cd2e985@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83960 > Ray: > As mentioned earlier, I read this comment differently. There really can't be > two "Prime" anythings, sachmet96: Yes there can. I don't see a problem with having two Prime Ministers. When the two governments are separated which I believe they are then it makes sense. Like most states do have PM, the difference is that while there is a territorial separation there, with the Muggle and Magical PM there is one between magical and non magical people. Ray > so the phrase "Muggle Prime Minister" says to me that > the WW believes that the PM and other Ministers dictate life in the Muggle > world, not theirs. sachmet96: I agree and that is why I believe the WW can have a prime minister too. Ray: > The existance of the Minister of Magic, indeed, the entire > Ministry, is unknown to the Muggle world. > > I'm assuming that the WW recognizes the person and power of the Sovereign > (ancient instutions tend to respect each other, however grudgingly), and thus, it > is the Minister of Magic alone, and not the Prime Minister, who deleivers the > Queen's will to them. sachmet96: I hope no one takes this wrongly but why should the WW world accept/recognise the Queen? I don't think they would as they don't seem to have any (or very little) relation to the Muggle history. They stay out of Muggle affairs as far as possible and they teach History of Magic in school and not Muggle history which the Queen (monarchy) would be a part of. And when I was in Britain I noticed that the picture of the Queen can be found on the money, does she appear on the wizarding money too? I can't remember, but if she doesn't I would take that they don't accept the queen as their head of state. Ray: > Now, this does open the question of Parliament. Does the "muggle" parliament > make laws for the wizarding community? I doubt it. Nor do I imagine that > the MoM works by dictate of the Minister. Thus, there must be a representative > legislature of the WW, perhaps the Wizengamot or something like it. sachmet96: I see the WW as totally separated from the Muggle world with it's own government. I think the relationship between the two could be like the relationship between two countries, they just happen to share the same territory. From sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 2 01:05:40 2003 From: sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk (sachmet96) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 01:05:40 -0000 Subject: Wizards and the Queen In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83961 > > sachmet96 > > First, I am not British so I only have a basic idea about the UK > > government, but when it was said that Fudge informed the Muggle > Prime > > Minister I kind of assumed that because it is explicitly stated > that > > it is the Muggle Prime Minister there is also a 'Wizarding' Prime > > Minister, why else state the 'Muggle' if there was only one Prime > > Minister for the muggle and wizarding world? > > lola again... > why then has the magical Prime Minister not been mentioned? sachmet96 Because there was no need to mention the magical Prime Minister. It was an anouncement of the Ministry (which he would be part of). So imo only the Muggle one has to be mentioned who is not part of the Ministry. lola > And why > does Fudge have the title Minister of Magic, which gives him power > over all magical affairs? I see the title Minister of Magic equivalent/similar to a president of state, who in some countries does have very far reaching privileges. lola > I imagine that Fudge used the > term 'muggle' in this context derogatorily. It wasn't Fudge who used it but the Daily Prophet if I remember correctly. lola > We know that Fudge believes that Dumbledore, clearly Fudge's > superior in every way imaginable, is essentially 'out to get him.' I don't see why DD would be Fudges superior (apart from the obvious character traits). DD doesn't have a or as high a political position, so Fudges is his superior as he holds the position of Minister of Magic. lola > The impression I get is that Fudge believes that he is a master of > the universe. sachmet96: He definitely has delusions of grandeur. But we must consider that he holds a position that apparently enables him to do the things he does and I do believe he (and every other Minister of Magic) does have some legal backup to do those things. Fudge clearly abuses this power but non the less I think if someone else would have the position of Minister of Magic, they would have the same power but they might use it differently. And apparently there is no political institution that can (or wants to) control Fudge. From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 01:17:29 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 01:17:29 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83962 >Laura: > > As for whether Sirius's change of secret keeper was rash or > not, I'd say that's a matter of debate on this list.< > Pippin: > True. But I was referring to Sirius's decision to go after Pettigrew with no backup. Laura again: Oh-okay. But I doubt that even at that point Sirius saw Peter as a genuine threat-he'd never shown any sign of physical courage or mental agility before. > > Laura: > > Anyone who would take Rita at her word is a fool. Molly should > know that-everyone else seems to.< > Pippin: > Then I guess Hermione is a fool, since she called on Rita to > spread the word about Voldemort's return. Hermione could have > written the story herself, so I guess Hermione understands that > the Skeeter byline commands a lot of respect, despite Rita's > tendency to, er, exaggerate. Laura again: Hermione didn't have to worry about Rita doing what she was told-it wasn't an agreement, it was blackmail. (You go, Hermione!) Actually, though, what I meant was that anyone who would believe that Rita's stories are credible is a fool. Yeah, there are a lot of fools in the WW-sort of like the RW. But anyone who can think for themselves would take Rita's reporting with several pounds of salt. And certainly Molly, whose own husband got the Rita treatment at the beginning of GoF, should know better than to believe what Rita says in her articles. Pippin: > Anyway, Hermione is sad about the tiny egg, not angry at Molly. > She *wants* to be friends with Molly. It was just a stupid > misunderstanding, like Ron thinking that Harry had put his name > in the goblet. Laura again: I'm not talking about how Hermione felt, though. I'm talking about how Molly felt and acted. It was more than a stupid misunderstanding, imo-it was Molly choosing to believe a gossip sheet and getting emotionally involved in something that was none of her business. > > Laura: > > Show me the canon for your belief that DD asked Molly to take > >on legal responsibility for Harry. Pippin: > > Moral, not legal. Dumbledore, chapter 36, GoF. "Molly...am I right > in thinking I can count on you and Arthur?" And of course, he > invites Molly to Harry's bedside, along with Sirius, and meets > with her before she goes home. Laura again: I don't read DD's question as suggesting that Molly and Arthur should take over moral responsibility for Harry. The context is that of reforming the Order. Her response is "We know what Fudge is", not "Of course we'll take care of Harry." Molly was not actually invited to Harry's bedside-she was there with Bill, Hermione and Ron trying to find out where Harry was. DD allowed them all to stay with Harry's permission. The only person (as it were) whom DD explicitly invited to be with Harry was Sirius (GoF p.699 US). > Pippin: > I think Sirius's remark, "He's not your son," was just as hurtful as Molly's crack about Azkaban. For both Sirius and Molly, their > moral right to care for Harry is stronger than their legal one. Laura again: I don't know exactly how the godparent thing works but doesn't such a designation carry some moral, if not legal, weight? Sirius is the person Harry's parents chose to act in their stead if they were unable to care for Harry themselves. The implication I get from canon is that this allows Sirius to become Harry's substitute parent in a legal sense. Sirius's permission for Harry to go to Hogsmeade is sufficient for DD and McGonagall despite the lack of such permission from the Dursleys. And when Harry and Sirius talk about Harry coming to live with Sirius in the tunnel of the Shrieking Shack, there doesn't seem to be any question that Harry could do it- any legal question, that is. At that point we don't know about the protection problem and apparently neither does Sirius. By OoP he must have found out because he puts Harry off when Harry asks if he can come and live at GP. It just seems to me that Molly has an attitude in her dealings with Sirius, and I wonder if it might not be just a bit of jealousy. Harry has been included in her family for several years now, and has been happy and grateful to be. Still, as soon as Sirius comes onto the scene, Harry gives his greatest love and loyalty to him. He shows an intensity of feeling toward Sirius that he never shows toward Molly. Maybe it's natural that Molly should be hurt by this, but any parent who takes this sort of thing from a teenager personally is asking for hurt feelings. And if Molly had been a bit more mature herself, maybe she could have seen her reaction for what it was and dealt with it more constructively. The real sadness of the situation is that Harry needed both Sirius and Molly-a father figure and a mother figure. Molly might have made an effort to combine forces with Sirius instead of competing with him. Given Molly's age, parenting experience and general life experience, I put most of the blame for their antagonism with her. No, I don't think his remark to Molly was cruel at all-it was plain and simple fact. Harry, being Sirius's godson, was a lot closer to being his son than he was to being Molly's. Sirius clearly expected to start his duties as godfather as soon as he was cleared of the charges that had put him in Azkaban. And although circumstances interfered with that plan, Sirius still does as much as he can to care for Harry. But Molly never seemed to accept that. Laura: Molly is ready to indulge in a scene at the drop of a rubber wand, all the way through canon. > Pippin: > And Sirius isn't? Laura again: Nope. Sirius is calm, thoughtful and cautious througout GoF. Molly, on the other hand... One of the fun things about these discussions is that they're a bit of a Rorschach (sp?), aren't they? The ways that we see characters and events has as much to do with our own perspectives as with what JKR actually wrote. I guess what I'm revealing about myself is that I'm very uncomfortable with parents who smother their kids-which might mean that that's my natural impulse! So maybe I just don't like the Molly I see in myself. Laura, wondering for the nth time about her parenting skills-or lack thereof From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 2 02:57:21 2003 From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 02:57:21 -0000 Subject: confirmation .. Hogwarts is in Scotland In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83963 Astrofiammante wrote: >> I had cause to be wondering about locations too the other day And I thought what a great location Rannoch Moor would be for Hogwarts. It's under the Grampians, so seeing mountains in the distance would be no problem. It fits the conventional wisdom of Hogwarts being 'closer to Aberdeen than to Edinburgh'.>> (Kirstini's little disclaimer: This post may head slightly towards Off-Topicity at times, and if anyone wants to chat about Rannoch Moor, or the area surounding it in a way not connected directly to canon, please email me off-list. I'm fairly sure I can manage to get away with this within the context of canon discussion, though, so bear with me.) The point that Astrofiammante raised struck a huge, nostalgic, clang- you-all-the-way-back-to-your-childhood chord with me, as three weeks of every year of *my* childhood were spent in Kinlochrannoch, the village beside Loch Rannoch. And during those three weeks, a significant proportion of time would be spent hiking across Rannoch Moor to the Youth Hostel, which was ten miles away from the railway station and accessible only by foot over four hours + worth of spagnum moss and marsh. I was last there thirteen-ish years ago (teenage sulks having swiftly curbed any maternal desire to take family hikes) - so read these details as remembered from 1990, if you will: The Youth Hostel in question (Loch Ossian) has gained a certain amount of notoriety among those crazily hardened fools called Ramblers (of which my mother was a very merry member)as the most primitive Youth Hostel in Britain. It used to advertise itself as "the most remote shelter in Scotland"! (Bed and Breakfasts in Scotland guide 1988) which isn't strictly true, but it did well out of its primitivism (Toilets: a boys shack and a girls shack covering pits in the ground with plastic cylinders over the top, washing facilities: well, there's a loch [lake] isn't there? What do you mean, "it's November!"?). There was a forest over the other side of the loch [lake] from the Youth Hostel, which youth hostellers were advised not to enter on their hikes (Farmer owned it. But anyway...). Halfway across the moor was a spooky old building called Rannoch Lodge, a ruined old hunting house. I only remember viewing this place from a distance, so may be imagining a huge sign saying "Dangerous: Keep Away, Muggles!" posted somewhere near the pathway. However, my mother, in her enthusiasm to teach us all about our heritage, would surely have dragged us into the lodge had it been fit for visiting, so I stand by my unoccupiable ruin on Rannoch Moor. It is very possible, given the odd combination of tourist cachet and isolated wilderness which can only sleep twelve people that the youth hostel has going for it, that JKR visited the area at some point and picked up a little bit of inspiration somewhere along the way (Grindylows and Hinkeypunks dragging you down into the marsh? That woman has had a Bad Rambling Experience with spagnum moss too, you mark my words). And yet, none of this occurred to me - the whole geographic area has been lurking, all fertile in my mind and yet didn't form any sort of background image for my conception of Hogwarts/Hogsmeade. I suspect that this is because Hogwarts itself doesn't come accros as convincingly situated in Scotland to me. I know all the evidence for Hogwarts being in Scotland, and firmly believe with all the rational parts of my brain that it is, but as a Scot I have two huge problems with the Hogwarts location. 1.) Hogsmeade. This isn't a Scottish name. I hope someone will jump in and correct my woolly English geography, but a name like Hogsmeade suggests a particular area - middle-southern England, Robin Hood country - to me. Scottish towns and villages, particularly those as far north as Hogsmeade must be, are called by spiky names with many soft "chs", or musical names with successions of rolling "rrr"s in them. In fact (very happy to be proved wrong here) I have my doubts that "Hog" is an authentic-enough Scottish word for location anywhere in the country. 2.) If it's in Scotland, the Giant Squid doesn't live in a lake, it lives in a loch. This could be another clue - the only "Lake" in Scotland is Lake Catrine - has anyone had a wee search around that area of the map for possible locations? Anyway, here's the Youth Hostel at Loch Ossian on Rannoch Moor. It's certainly striking enough to be home to a Germanic castle, but I can't seem to find any shots of the Forbidden Forest. May have to scan in some old childhood photos of the Forest, editing out the gawky child with train-track braces and Bermuda shorts... http://www.syha.org.uk/pages/more-picture-pages/loch-ossian.htm Kirstini, resident Scot. From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 02:58:10 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 02:58:10 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited (WAS: Who Will Betray the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83964 > I submit that no evil character in Rowling ever gets off a good > line. > > Pippin > who can't remember that Lupin has ever said anything funny PoA ch. 19: "No one's going to try and kill you until we've sorted a few things out," said Lupin. Annemehr, Lupin Apologist (if we're on?) From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Sun Nov 2 03:51:33 2003 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 03:51:33 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Weasley twins [very interesting idea] Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83965 "jeffl1965" said: > Most interesting! I thought the Twins were just odd, but not >*that* odd. :) I think Kreacher is the one that's odd. He's mentally ill, and kept ignorant in the way that only a willing slave mentality can be kept. I don't think Kreacher even had a normal house-elf life. I think he's even worse than Dobby was in that respect, because Dobby was perfectly healthy mentally -- that's why he had such a serious conflict between his normal instincts and the strictures upon his behavior as a house-elf (leading to him ironing his hands, shutting his ears in doors, etc.). Someone whose mind is completely bent and whose entire attention (1) is focussed on the personalities of equally warped Dark wizards like the rest of the Black family will think that *anything* they don't immediately understand or that doesn't fit into their limited frame of reference must be wrong and therefore to be hated. The Weasleys aren't muggles nor muggle-born, but they willingly consort with muggles and muggle-borns. Therefore the Weasley family become "blood traitors," "blood traitor brats," and "unnatural." Kreacher's limited experience may never have included twins (which aren't that common, and identical twins are even less so). If he'd never seen it before and didn't understand it, it must be evil. There's also the possibility that in the wizarding world people can in fact make themselves doppelgangers or homunculi, and that Kreacher thinks that's what is going on. But personally, I think he's just compounded of equal parts of mental illness and spite. Look at Sirius's mother, his chief role model ... Janet Anderson (1) He's certainly not focussing his attention on anything else. Other house-elves, including Dobby both before and after his freedom, have work to do and do it. Kreacher has lots of work he could be doing, but he hasn't so much as brushed aside a cobweb for years. _________________________________________________________________ Want to check if your PC is virus-infected? Get a FREE computer virus scan online from McAfee. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963 From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 07:34:39 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 07:34:39 -0000 Subject: confirmation .. Hogwarts is in Scotland In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83966 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" wrote: > ...edited... as three weeks of every year of *my* childhood were > spent in Kinlochrannoch, the village beside Loch Rannoch. > bboy_mn: Wonderful childhood memories, thanks for sharing those with us, and thanks for the link to the Youth Hostel (ahh... to be young again). But Loch Ronnoch is right off of a highway on my map, and I don't think that would do for Hogwarts. The place has to be much more remote than that, if you want to keep the prying eyes of muggle away. So I've isolated four areas of Northern Scotland that are vast expanses of open unspoiled areas generally free of roads, towns, and rail. Of course, I've never been there (sighs regretfully), so everything I know is from paper maps, satellite images, and the internet. 1.)Just north east of the area you suggested are the Cairngorn Moutains and a place called Ben Macdui, although I can't tell exactly whe Ben Macdui is. This is a very large very rugged area that is very isolated. 2.)Just west of that bounded by highway A9 on the east and Loch Ness on the west are the Monadhliath Moutains. Again a very rugged and isolated area. 3.)Cross Loch Ness and move into the true northern Highland into the area that surrounds Loch Monar. Bounded by Hwys A890 & A832 on the North West, A835 on the North, Loch Ness on the East, and Hwy A87 on the south. 4.)Cross Hwy A835 and move north into the Easter Ross areas. Bounded on the North by A837/A836, and on the East by Cromarty Firth. All four of these, as I have said, are large tracks of unspoil wilderness, with very few towns, roads, or rails. For some insight into what these areas look like, check out the absolutely magnificent Carbisdale Castle Youth Hostel. This is youth hostel living of Royal magnitude. - http://www.syha.org.uk/pages/more-picture-pages/carbisdale.htm http://www.carbisdale.org/pages/virtual-tour/virtual-tour-1.htm At this last site, move your mouse around the photo of the Castle until it turns into a link pointer, then click and you can view the interior of that part fo the castle. It will blow you away! Also, check out the historic photos, there is a very good one showing a very large terrace area with a view of the lake. Very reminicent of Hogwarts. > Kirstini: > > And yet, none of this occurred to me - the whole geographic area has > been lurking, all fertile in my mind and yet didn't form any sort of > background image for my conception of Hogwarts/Hogsmeade. I suspect > that this is because Hogwarts itself doesn't come accros as > convincingly situated in Scotland to me. ...edited... > > 1.) Hogsmeade. This isn't a Scottish name. I hope someone will jump > in and correct my woolly English geography, but a name like > Hogsmeade suggests a particular area - middle-southern England, ... > bboy_mn: When I think of Hogsmeade, I get the image of the towns the spring up outside the gates of military bases; house of ill-repute, bars, pawn shops, fast food, etc.... These are communties of opportunity. I think Hogsmeade sprang up the same way. The school was there which made the area a destination for wizards, there had to be businesses to support the school and staff, businesses to entice the students sprang up, and all the secondary business to support the primary businesses soon appeared. Gradually, a town grew up outside the entrance to the school, again a town of opportunity; people will go to places where there is money to be made. My point is, that this town is more an extension of Hogwarts, which doesn't sound all that Scottish to me, rather than an extenion of Scotland or the native people of that area. One could deconstruct the names as Hogworts (I know it's mispelled, but spellings change in 1,000 years time) which could mean 'Hogs Plant', and Hogmeade, could be broken down to 'Hogs Meadow'. Those are very similar, and could be based on a native plant to that area. Unless I'm mistaken, and occassionally, I am, 'hogwarts' actually is the name of a plant, some type of water lily I think. I will acknowledge, and therefore save other's the trouble, that these two names can be deconstructed in other ways. It could be 'hogs lump' and 'hogs brew', but those seem are less likely. The point is that in this very isolated village with so much general wizard influence and it's close association with the school, it doesn't seem unreasonable that it's name would not reflect local culture. >Kirstini: > > 2.) If it's in Scotland, the Giant Squid doesn't live in a lake, it > lives in a loch. This could be another clue - the only "Lake" in > Scotland is Lake Catrine - has anyone had a wee search around that > area of the map for possible locations? > bboy_mn: So, am I safe in assuming that in Scotland the difference between a lake and a loch, is that a loch is any lake that is connected to the ocean in some way (like connected by a river), and a lake is a stand-alone unconnected slef-contained body of fresh water? I also want to point out that the lake at Hogwarts is a 'lake', and not a 'Lake'. For it to be a 'Lake' with a capital 'L', it would have to be named; Lake Spooky or something. But as it stands, it is never named, only described, and I think most English people would describe a Loch as a lake, while at the same time, would not change the name of Loch Ness to Lake Ness. Restated, they would describe Loch Ness as a big lake. > Kirstini: > > Anyway, here's the Youth Hostel at Loch Ossian on Rannoch Moor. It's > certainly striking enough to be home to a Germanic castle, but I > can't seem to find any shots of the Forbidden Forest. May have to > scan in some old childhood photos of the Forest, editing out the > gawky child with train-track braces and Bermuda shorts... > > http://www.syha.org.uk/pages/more-picture-pages/loch-ossian.htm > > Kirstini, resident Scot. bboy_mn: That's a great link, with a map showing Youth Hostels all over the Highlands. Some very interesting places and beautiful country side. Everyone should really check it out. Also, I'm not trying to say your are wrong wrong wrong. This is fiction, so if the area you described is Howarts to you, then more power to you. It's just my over-thought and mostly uninformed opinion that Howarts/Hogsmeade has to be in an extremely isolated area. Peace out. bboy_mn From liwy_500 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 00:31:41 2003 From: liwy_500 at yahoo.com (LIWY) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 00:31:41 -0000 Subject: Weasley twins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83967 Louise wrote: >I'm speculating that the Weasley twins are not true twins, but some >sort of single entity magically split in two Golly replied: >Isn't that what an identical twin is? An entity split >from one person into two? Well, I'm not confident of my grasp of the biology of this, but as I recall, identical twins are the result of a single fertilized egg splitting in two, so in a sense your statement would probably be accurate. But since Louise has suggested she thinks there is a difference between them and normal twins, then that probably isn't what she means. From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 2 07:54:21 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 07:54:21 -0000 Subject: confirmation .. Hogwarts is in Scotland - MAPS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83968 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > bboyy_mn: > > Most of you have seen this already, bus as the subject has come up, I > will post it agian. > > Web link - Location of Peebles relative to nearest UK rail line- > http://bluemoonmarket.homestead.com/Files/Hogwarts/UK-Rail1.htm > I hate to quibble with the information on the web site, but Peebles hasn't had a rail link since the 1960s. IIRC, it was on the old "Waverley Route" from Carlisle to Edinburgh which was closed along with thousands of other miles of lines under the Beeching Plan. Any train heading northwards from Kings Cross to Scotland would either follow the East Coast Main Line (ECML) into Edinburgh or swing west at Newcastle across to Carlisle and pick up the WCML through Lockerbie and Motherwell into Glasgow. Geoff: (Life long UK rail enthusiast) From HimemyaUtena at aol.com Sun Nov 2 01:17:51 2003 From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com) Date: Sat, 01 Nov 2003 20:17:51 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) Message-ID: <57626B57.64C9BB2C.1E595A1B@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 83969 In a message dated 11/1/2003 4:36:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net writes: [Susan] > I may just be being dense here [that has certainly happened here > before!], but I thought the whole reason for Sirius's suggesting > Peter as SecretKeeper was that he [Sirius] DIDN'T want to be in the > know. He'd said he would have been too obvious a choice for that, > right? So if Peter told Sirius *anyway*, then what's the > point of > using Peter? If you refer to the beginning of Order of the Phoenix, I believe the idea is that the actual secret keeper has to be the one to reveal the secret. Or else it doesn't work. Dumbledore is the secret keeper for the Order. Only he can tell Harry where the Order is. The other members of the Advanced Guard know where the Order is, but even if they tell Harry, Harry still won't be able to see it. Not until Dumbledore tells him in one form or another. So...even if Peter told Sirius where the Potters were living, and Sirius was tortured by Voldemort and actually told him the address, Voldemort would still be unable to find them because the secret keeper (Peter) didn't reveal the address. I hope that makes sense. Adrianna From Jpcfaith at aol.com Sun Nov 2 01:33:42 2003 From: Jpcfaith at aol.com (hypatia423) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 01:33:42 -0000 Subject: Kreacher and Filch: Brothers in Betrayal? (McGonagall? No way!) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83970 I struggle to believe for even an instant that Minerva McGonagall would betray the Order. Surely her lack of celebration at Voldemort's initial demise was due to sadness at the deaths of James and Lily, and concern for leaving Harry on the doorstep of "the worst sort of Muggles imaginable"? Neither Dumbledore nor Hagrid were cheerful either, and all three were farsighted enough to know the demise was temporary. Kreacher proved it is not necessary to be in the Order to betray it. He played a pivotal role by providing crucial information to both Narcissa Malfoy and to Harry. What do Kreacher and Filch have in common? Deep, sullen, smoldering resentment. Kreacher had no loyalty to Sirius. Filch has no loyalty to Dumbledore. Look how he kowtowed to Umbridge, overjoyed at her permission to (at last!) use corporal punishment on Dumbledore's students. Filch is an angry, aging, humiliated Squib in the midst of flowering young witches and wizards. How could he not be resentful? He seems to view Harry with particular malice. With JKR's foreshadowing in mind, I see that Kreacher, not a central character, brought about the destruction of Sirius. If, on Voldemort's "map" there is a big red pin stuck right in the vicinity of Hogwarts, what might we expect from a similar non-central character,just as strategically placed? I think we need to keep an eye on Argus Filch. His years of powerlessness, rage and resentment make him dangerous. He would be soft clay in Voldemort's skilled fingers. From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Sun Nov 2 11:08:51 2003 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 11:08:51 -0000 Subject: Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83971 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > I would guess that Dumbledore and Sirius were both let in on > the secret by Peter (though Dumbledore thought it was Sirius), > but couldn't themselves reveal it to anyone else. > > Pippin Hmm, this one I don't understand. How could Dumbledore think it was Sirius if it was actually Peter who let him in on the secret? Inge From zanelupin at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 11:20:26 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 11:20:26 -0000 Subject: Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83972 Pippin: >>I would guess that Dumbledore and Sirius were both let in on the secret by Peter (though Dumbledore thought it was Sirius), but couldn't themselves reveal it to anyone else.<< Inge: >Hmm, this one I don't understand. How could Dumbledore think it was Sirius if it was actually Peter who let him in on the secret?< Remember in OoP, Harry learned the secret of 12 Grimmauld Place not by word of mouth but by memorizing a piece of paper. Dumbledore did not have to be face to face with Pettigrew to be in on the secret. All Peter would have to do is write a little note to Dumbledore. And if he disguised his handwriting, how would Dumbledore know it was Peter rather than Sirius? KathyK, who would like to elaborate but must go to work instead. From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Sun Nov 2 12:09:43 2003 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 12:09:43 -0000 Subject: Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83973 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > I would guess that Dumbledore and Sirius were both let in on > the secret by Peter (though Dumbledore thought it was Sirius), > but couldn't themselves reveal it to anyone else. > > Pippin Hmm, this one I don't understand. How could Dumbledore think it was Sirius if it was actually Peter who let him in on the secret? Inge From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 2 12:49:42 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 12:49:42 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83974 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > > Laura again: > I don't know exactly how the godparent thing works but doesn't such > a designation carry some moral, if not legal, weight? Sirius is the > person Harry's parents chose to act in their stead if they were > unable to care for Harry themselves. The implication I get from > canon is that this allows Sirius to become Harry's substitute parent > in a legal sense. Sirius's permission for Harry to go to Hogsmeade > is sufficient for DD and McGonagall despite the lack of such > permission from the Dursleys. And when Harry and Sirius talk about > Harry coming to live with Sirius in the tunnel of the Shrieking > Shack, there doesn't seem to be any question that Harry could do it- > any legal question, that is. At that point we don't know about the > protection problem and apparently neither does Sirius. By OoP he > must have found out because he puts Harry off when Harry asks if he > can come and live at GP. > Oh, dear. Can we inject a bit of realism in here please? Just what sort of surrogate parent would Sirius be? He's spent 12 years in Azkaban and is a wanted criminal on the run. He has no experience of dealing or coping with children. He has no idea of their needs, emotional or physical. He is rash, disruptive, argumentative, compulsive, naive and has totally unrealistic expectations of Harry. He is not to be trusted. Just because Harry has fantasies of leaving the Dursleys does not make Sirius an ideal replacement. Harry is not to be trusted either, especially when he knows almost nothing of the true situation. What makes you think that any of the powers that be would allow Harry and Sirius to make their own arrangements (after the Shrieking Shack)? Might as well paint a target on Harry's back. Do you really think that the WW courts would kiss and make up with Sirius, even if Pettigrew did tell the truth? He'd be staight back into Azkaban for being an unregistered Animagus. If he got off that charge, where would he and Harry go? Grimmauld Place without DD's protection? What a thought! Molly has her feet on the ground, she recognises just how dangerous Sirius would be as a guardian - you might as well hand Harry over to the Malfoys. Sirius does not listen, he does not think, he only feels. Molly also realises the unthinking admiration Harry has for Sirius, he sees him as a glamorous figure to be admired and emulated - a very dangerous mindset. Molly is not smart, she can't challenge Sirius on an intellectual or logical level; all she can do is snipe and hope that Harry will see reason. It doesn't work, which raises her levels of concern to where she just sounds carping. But anyone with an ounce of common sense must realise that Sirius is bad for Harry. He is Harry's Achilles heel; Harry can be got at through Sirius. Voldy soon realised this when he started probing Harry's mind. I've posted on this before and I believe that DD and a few other thinking wizards were vastly relieved when Sirius took his final curtain. Maybe they helped him on his way, a poignant memory is preferable to an active danger. > The real sadness of the situation is that Harry needed both Sirius > and Molly-a father figure and a mother figure. Molly might have > made an effort to combine forces with Sirius instead of competing > with him. Given Molly's age, parenting experience and general life > experience, I put most of the blame for their antagonism with her. > Can't agree. Sirius is not interested in joining forces, only in being sole mentor. Molly's parenting experience tells her that Sirius would be a disaster waiting to happen. Sirius would soon be manipulating Harry emotionally into being his (Sirius') surrogate. Harry would be dead in three weeks. > Harry, being Sirius's godson, was a lot closer to > being his son than he was to being Molly's. Sirius clearly expected > to start his duties as godfather as soon as he was cleared of the > charges that had put him in Azkaban. Not so. A godfather has no familial link to his godson. It is that of a religious guide *only*. Usually it is not even that, just a walk-on part in a mainly social event, reserved for friends of the parents. Harry is no-ones son except Lily and James'; but he does need a responsible guardian - and Sirius is not it. Kneasy From deemarie1a at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 13:02:53 2003 From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 13:02:53 -0000 Subject: Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83975 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > It seems that people who know the secret, but aren't themselves > the secretkeeper, can't reveal it to anybody else. Dumbledore > says that because Kreacher is not Secret Keeper for the Order, > he can't reveal where the headquarters is. > > Judging by what Flitwick said, even if Sirius took Voldemort right > up to the Potters' window, Voldemort still wouldn't be able to see > them, or even realize that they were there. Only Peter could give > them away. But once the house was destroyed, it no longer > exisited and the spell couldn't hide it anymore. > > I would guess that Dumbledore and Sirius were both let in on > the secret by Peter (though Dumbledore thought it was Sirius), > but couldn't themselves reveal it to anyone else. > > Pippin When the members of the first order discovered there was a traitor in their midst, they found out that LV had specifically targeted the Potters once again. Suspicions were cast upon Remus, for what reason we do not know. Yet, they could not give away that they knew there was a spy amongst them. No one would suspect Sirius because of his relationship with James. It was obvious to everyone that the Potters would have to go into hiding. So, DD volunteered to be the secret keeper, but James did not want to put DD in any more danger than he already was. He convinced DD to use Sirius, but Sirius thought that Peter would be the better keeper. Now as to the secret itself. I don't think that it was the fact that they were in Godrick's Hollow. I believe it was the fact that they remained in their house. That's why Flitwick said LV could walk right up and look into the house and still not find them. So, Godrick's Hollow was obviously not the secret. They performed the charm on Peter and swept him away to a safe place. Now, remember that it was a week after the charm was performed that the Potters were given up and they were murdered. Obviously, Peter was being watched. Perhaps Peter was given the opportunity to betray the Potters because a Mundungus like incident happened with Peter. He saw his opportunity to tell LV and off he went. Sirius had gone to check on Peter. Why did he feel the need to go to check? Perhaps, like what happened to Harry in OotP, the guard was discovered to have disappeared. I suspect that once the charm was performed on Peter, he did tell Sirius where the Potters were. Why else would Sirius go to Godrick's Hollow after Peter was discovered to be missing. I cannot see James not having Sirius know where he, Lily and Harry were. But since Sirius was not the secret keeper he could not reveal the location. I also think that Peter did tell DD where the Potters were. Again, not being the secret keeper, DD could not reveal the location where they were hiding. Thus when the secret was revealed and the Potters were murdered, the secret was broken, and DD could tell Hagrid where to go to get Harry. Of course, I could be wrong... D From deemarie1a at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 13:12:17 2003 From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 13:12:17 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83976 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > A godfather has no familial link to his godson. It is that of a religious > guide *only*. Usually it is not even that, just a walk-on part in a > mainly social event, reserved for friends of the parents. > > Kneasy In our modern society, the connotation of Godparent is one of a religious significance. Many years ago, though, that was the way of appointing the guardian of a child should something happen to the parent. I suspect that it still carries that significance (sorry about the spelling, just a little too sleepy to check) in the WW. I suspect the WW hasn't quite caught up with the times. I suspect that godparenting still carries the guardianship connotation in the WW. Of course, I could be wrong... D From elfundeb at comcast.net Sun Nov 2 12:59:23 2003 From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 07:59:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizard government (was wizards and the queen) References: Message-ID: <002f01c3a141$23c40160$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net> No: HPFGUIDX 83977 Astrofiammante wrote: [snipped background on legislative/executive/judicial separation and checks and balances in muggle world] > In the magical world, we've seen plenty about the executive - the > Ministry of Magic is a big sprawling beast with practically unlimited > influence. > > We've seen a little of the judiciary in the form of the Wizengamot. > Doesn't it strike you how dominated it is by the executive? Yes. Unlike courts of law in the US and the UK, the presiding officer is part of the executive branch. In the pensieve trials Crouch Sr. presided as head of the Department of Magical Law Enforcement (judge and prosecutor); here his successor Amelia Bones should have been in charge. That in itself is a breach of our separation of powers principles. The fact that Fudge apparently took over Harry's hearing demonstrates an appalling breach of procedural safeguards, if not a total lack of them. Also, Fudge and his fellow presiding officers were labeled "Interrogators". Not exactly an English common-law model. The Wizengamot may be the technical equivalent of the judiciary, but in fact they appear to function solely as a jury substitute, as it's very clear that DMLE, and ultimately Fudge himself, controls trial proceedings. Fudge also seems to control who serves on the Wizengamot, since he was able to demote Dumbledore from his position as Chief Warlock. > And have we seen anything of the legislature? Could it be one of > the 'grand council of wizard' bodies to which Dumbledore belongs? Or > has anyone got any better suggestions? In any case, it hardly strikes > me as a dominant feature of wizard government. Who is originating the > laws? Fudge? In which case he's more or less a dictator, benevolent > or otherwise. There's not much evidence that a legislature even exists. There are some "Acts" which by their name should have been passed by a legislature. But then in OOP, ch. 15, the Daily Prophet refers to the Educational Decrees as "new laws" that were "passed" by "the Ministry of Magic". To me, a "decree" sounds more like an edict (or regulation) issued by an executive than a piece of legislation passed by a legislature. Sometimes I think this is an example of JKR showing how arbitrary WW government is, but it may just be sloppy usage of language by someone who is not schooled in the law. The Daily Prophet article announcing Umbridge's appointment as High Inquisitor is quite interesting in its phrasing: "In a surprise move last night, the Ministry of Magic passed new legislation giving itself an unprecedented level of control at Hogwarts" The Decree was passed at night. If there was a real legislature (and I don't think the International Confederation of Wizards is it because the MoM is not an international organization) how much notice was given to likely dissenters? No more than Harry got regarding the change in time and place of his hearing, I'll bet. And, very telling, "Wizengamot elders Griselda Marchbanks and Tiberius Ogden have resigned in protest." Could the Wizengamot serve as the legislative as well as the judicial body? Like a general council of wizards? Otherwise resigning from the Wizengamot seems like an odd response to an act of the legislature. If the Wizengamot was the legislature, I doubt Marchbanks and Ogden got notice of that late-night session. Really, there doesn't seem to be time for any real legislative process. Educational Decree No. 24, the one that authorized Umbridge to disband all student organizations, was apparently issued on a Sunday (the day after the meeting at the Hogs Head). It seems to me that Fudge effectively controls the legislature -- even if it exists -- if he can call a session and arrange for selective notice in order to pass decrees to increase his own power to engage in micromanagement. The Daily Prophet gave us a hint of that when it stated (regarding ED No. 23) that *Fudge* (not the legislature) "has used new laws to effect improvements". There's also no indication that any legislative body (whether or not it's the Wizengamot or the International Confederation) is elected. The MoM seems to have the power to oust people from Wizengamot and International Confederation of Wizards positions. These scattered facts about how the MoM operates creates the flavor of a cozy little oligarchy that determines who is appointed to all positions, with the Minister having ultimate authority over everything, much like a monarch in the old days before the Muggle world and the WW split apart. In fact, I envision a process like the papal college of cardinals, in which the pope selects the cardinals, and when the pope dies the cardinals select the new pope from among their number. It's interesting that Dumbledore never wanted the MoM job, where he would have been able to institute reform from the inside. Perhaps JKR believes that governments are inevitably corrupt, and that true reform can only come from the outside. Debbie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Zarleycat at aol.com Sun Nov 2 14:50:56 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 14:50:56 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83978 Kneasy said: > Oh, dear. > Can we inject a bit of realism in here please? > Just what sort of surrogate parent would Sirius be? > > He's spent 12 years in Azkaban and is a wanted criminal on the run. > He has no experience of dealing or coping with children. > He has no idea of their needs, emotional or physical. > He is rash, disruptive, argumentative, compulsive, naive and has totally > unrealistic expectations of Harry. > He is not to be trusted. Now me: I know that Sirius is by far not your favorite character, Kneasy, but I think some of your reasons listed above don't hold water. No idea of emotional or physical needs of children? As someone who came from a family where emotional support was lacking, I'd say that Sirius would have a very good idea of the support needed by a kid. Physical needs? What are you saying here - that it wouldn't occur to Sirius that Harry would need food, shelter, clothing? Or that he wouldn't be able to handle a discussion about hormones? I don't understand where that's coming from. No experience coping or dealing with children. True, but lots of first-time parents have none of that, either. And they have to tend to all the needs of a newborn, not with a teen, who, at the very least can articulate what needs are not being met. Unless you're advocating that only those people who've tended to younger siblings, or who have years of experience baby-sitting or who have an extended family to help with child care should have children, then this falls by the wayside. I'm not going to respond to your other points, as I know they are firmly held opinions of Sirius' character, and we will never come to agreement on that. Kneasy: > Just because Harry has fantasies of leaving the Dursleys does not make > Sirius an ideal replacement. Harry is not to be trusted either, especially > when he knows almost nothing of the true situation. What makes you think > that any of the powers that be would allow Harry and Sirius to make their > own arrangements (after the Shrieking Shack)? Might as well paint a > target on Harry's back. Do you really think that the WW courts would > kiss and make up with Sirius, even if Pettigrew did tell the truth? He'd be > staight back into Azkaban for being an unregistered Animagus. If he > got off that charge, where would he and Harry go? Grimmauld Place without > DD's protection? What a thought! Me: All this is speculation that can never be supported one way or the other because if Pettigrew had been brought in to tell his story, the entire course of the Potter series would have gone in a different direction. But, as you've gone in that direction, yes, I think, had Pettigrew been apprehended and the true story came out, Sirius would have been cleared. And, in an effort to make up for their appalling lack of justice, the MoM would have waived any punishment for the illegal Animagus as long as Sirius registered. And, at some point, DD would have stepped in and broken the news to Harry and Sirius about the need for Harry to stay with the Dursleys. But,just as Harry has been allowed to visit the Burrow, he could always have visited Sirius. And I doubt he'd take up residence at Grimmauld Place, but would have found somewhere else to live. So, yes, I think it could have worked without Harry having to give up his protections. Kneasy: > Molly also realises the unthinking admiration Harry has for Sirius, he > sees him as a glamorous figure to be admired and emulated - a very > dangerous mindset. Me: Then Molly is once again misreading the situation. In the very first chapter Harry smothers his impulse to go take on Dudley and his friends, mentally acknowledging that his non-action would make Sirius happy - that he, Harry, hadn't done anything rash. Harry's actions in the books may at times be interpreted as rash or impulsive, but no where that I can recall does he leap blindly into action because he wants to be a Junior Sirius or because he wants action for action's sake or because he's looking for thrills. I don't get the impression at all that Harry finds Sirius a glamorous figure or has unthinking admiration. He saw him first and foremost as a link to his parents, particularly his father. In OoP, Harry feels a great deal of empathy for Sirius because he sees them both in similar situations - locked up, cut off, and having most of their society believing awful things about them that are simply not true. But nowhere in this did I see the sort of blind hero worship that you see. Kneasy: Molly is not smart, she can't challenge Sirius on an > intellectual or logical level; all she can do is snipe and hope that Harry > will see reason. It doesn't work, which raises her levels of concern to > where she just sounds carping. But anyone with an ounce of common > sense must realise that Sirius is bad for Harry. Me: And, what a pretty picture you're painting of Molly - dumb and shrewish ;-) Kneasy: > He is Harry's Achilles heel; Harry can be got at through Sirius. Voldy soon > realised this when he started probing Harry's mind. I've posted on this > before and I believe that DD and a few other thinking wizards were vastly > relieved when Sirius took his final curtain. Maybe they helped him on his way, > a poignant memory is preferable to an active danger. Me: And, I do hope you're wrong about that. It's so cold-blooded to me, even though I understand that sometimes the greater good takes precedence over the wants/needs of individuals. Call me an old softy, but I do hope that the final denouement of the series is not going to reveal that many of those we thought were good were Evil! and that DD is completely Machiavellian. Sometimes bad things happen because they happen, not because every move everyone makes is a step in some grand, pre-choreographed scheme... Laura wrote: > > The real sadness of the situation is that Harry needed both Sirius > > and Molly-a father figure and a mother figure. Molly might have > > made an effort to combine forces with Sirius instead of competing > > with him. Given Molly's age, parenting experience and general life > > experience, I put most of the blame for their antagonism with her. Kneasy: > Can't agree. Sirius is not interested in joining forces, only in being > sole mentor. Molly's parenting experience tells her that Sirius would > be a disaster waiting to happen. Sirius would soon be manipulating > Harry emotionally into being his (Sirius') surrogate. Harry would be dead > in three weeks. Me: Are you saying this with the idea that, if Sirius was sole mentor, he and Harry would be off living someplace by themselves? Because, if we're talking about this within the contraints of OoP, I don't see how Harry's interactions with Sirius would not have been appreciably different than what they were. Sirius would still be cooped up in the house, the methods of communication would still be as dodgy as they were. I think Laura is right in that the best situation as set up in OoP would have been for Molly and Sirius to work together. But, each of them brought baggage with them - Molly's stress and upset over the Percy situation, her worries about her kids, especially since now Bill and Charlie are working for the Order, her having to accept people she doesn't approve of, like Mundungus and Sirius. And Sirius is back living in the house from hell, constrained from much interaction with Harry, surrounded by people who have had actual lives over the past 14 years, some of whom may only be accepting his presence because Dumbledore has said they should trust him. Neither Sirius or Molly is in a particularly comfortable position. Marianne From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Nov 2 16:02:12 2003 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 2 Nov 2003 16:02:12 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1067788932.20.39746.m19@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 83979 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, November 2, 2003 Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CST (GMT-06:00) Hi everyone! Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. *Chat times are not changing for Daylight Saving/Summer Time.* Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. Go into any Yahoo chat room and type /join HP:1 For further info, see the Humongous BigFile, section 3.3. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/hbfile.html#33 Hope to see you there! From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 16:21:28 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 08:21:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) Message-ID: <20031102162128.343.qmail@web40004.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 83980 2Nov03 Laura wrote: "...Yeah, Molly is way out of line throughout OoP...." "By the time we get to OoP, she has decided that she can ignore the wishes of Harry's parents and insert herself in loco parentis to Harry. Why? We have never seen Sirius give Harry bad or irresponsible advice up to the point of the conversation in the kitchen of GP. ...Where does she get off telling Sirius that he's an inadequate godfather? It's not like Harry went to Molly for advice ...So what makes her think she has any right to overrule his legal guardian?..." Paula now: OK, Laura, get your blood pressure down. Hysterical types like Mrs Weasley really get us type A personalities going--oops, did I take my pressure pill this morning? Now take a deep breath and remember who we're dealing with here. Mrs Weasley is simply not the type that operates on reason as we know it. She's all emotion and heart, takes in everybody, and doesn't know how not to worry. But please, cut her a little slack. These types often have very accurate gut instincts. They can't explain a thing, everything just goes straight from the subconscious to the gut. IMHO, this is what JKR was telling us about Molly's character when we saw the Boggart turning into dead bodies of Molly's family and Harry. Boggarts can read everyone 100%. So, Molly's not out of line, she's just being Molly ~Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rusalka at ix.netcom.com Sun Nov 2 17:02:06 2003 From: rusalka at ix.netcom.com (marinafrants) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:02:06 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: <20031102162128.343.qmail@web40004.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83981 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Paula Gaon wrote: > Mrs Weasley is simply not the type that operates on reason as we know it. She's all emotion and heart, takes in everybody, and doesn't know how not to worry. IMHO, this is what JKR was telling us about Molly's character when we saw the Boggart turning into dead bodies of Molly's family and Harry. Boggarts can read everyone 100%. So, Molly's not out of line, she's just being Molly > I agree that Molly's behavior in OOP is consistent with her previously established character. But "being out of line" and "just being Molly" are not mutually exclusive. Most people are just being themselves when they do whatever they do, out of line or not. Snape is just being Snape when he terrorizes Neville. Remus was just being Remus when he kept crucial information from Dumbledore in PoA. Heck, Voldemort is just being Voldemort when he goes around killing and torturing people. This doesn't make their actions any less "out of line." Marina rusalka at ix.netcom.com From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Nov 2 17:22:15 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:22:15 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited (WAS: Who Will Betray the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83982 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: > > > I submit that no evil character in Rowling ever gets off a good > > line. > > > > Pippin > > who can't remember that Lupin has ever said anything funny > > PoA ch. 19: > > "No one's going to try and kill you until we've sorted a few things > out," said Lupin. > > Annemehr, > Lupin Apologist (if we're on?) Jen: I laughed at this one because of Lupin's dry humor: "And this is Nymphadora--" "Don't call me Nymphadora, Remus," said the young witch with a shudder. "It's Tonks." "--Nymphadora Tonks, who prefers to be known by her surname only," finished Lupin. (OOTP, US, chap. 3, p. 49) Oh, and this too: ...Harry wished they would look at something other than him; it was as though he had suddenly been ushered onstage. He also wondered why so many of them were there. "A surprising number of people volunteered to come and get you," said Lupin, as though he had read Harry's mind; the corners of his mouth twitched slighty. (OOTP, chap. 3, p. 50) OK, it's not exactly Mad-Eye and buttocks-safety funny, but Lupin has his own subtle humor. Jen, also a Lupin apologist and proud of it... From Zarleycat at aol.com Sun Nov 2 17:39:50 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:39:50 -0000 Subject: Snape & Harry's Memory Perspective Question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83983 I had a thought about the memories that Snape and Harry see in each other's minds during the Occlumency lessons, in particular, the viewpoint in which the memories are seen. In Harry's first lesson, the memories that Snape brings up all seem to be remembered from Harry's perspective. (p.534, US edition). Harry watches Dudley riding a new bike, Ripper chases him up a tree and he sees the Dursleys below him laughing at him, he sits beneath the Sorting Hat, Cho draws nearer to him. In a later lesson, (p. 592), Harry sees the shouting hook-nosed man, a cowering woman and a crying child. He sees a greasy-haired teen shooting down flies. A girl is laughing as a scrawny boy tries to mount a bucking broom. Harry assumes that the boy in each of these visions was Snape. What I'm curious about is the nature of perspective. When breaking into another's mind, does the one breaking in see the memories with the same perspective that the memories' owner sees? Or does the Legilimens see the memory as if it were like thoughts trapped in a Pensieve, where the perspective is that of an outside observer? When Snape sees Harry's memories, is he seeing all the action from the outside, or is he looking through Harry's eyes? Is he seeing the dog barking and snapping at his own heels (as Harry would), looking down from his perch into the upraised faces of the laughing Dursleys, or is his point of view from off to the side? Since we're dealing with magic, perhaps a Legilimens does see another's memories from the position of outside observer, rather seeing these events the way the person who experienced remembers them. But, if a Legilimens is gaining access to the memories exactly as their target remembers them, then they would see it from the target's perspective. If that's the case, then the memories Harry got from Snape would also have been as seen through Snape's eyes. And, that would mean that what Harry saw were events that Snape himself had observed. Harry assumes he's seeing Snape, but maybe that's not the case. Maybe Snape was neither the shouting man or the frightened child, but someone who had just walked into the room to see that. Snape could have been a sibling of the child in the memory, for instance. I don't know what any of this means, other than my life would be simpler if I dropped right off to sleep at night rather than indulging in Potter speculation. But, so often JKR paints a picture that seems quite clear and obvious, only to reveal later on that what we thought we saw and understood was completely wrong. Marianne From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 2 17:51:30 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:51:30 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83984 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" wrote: >> > I know that Sirius is by far not your favorite character, Kneasy, > Good heavens! Whatever gives you that idea? > but > I think some of your reasons listed above don't hold water. No idea > of emotional or physical needs of children? As someone who came from > a family where emotional support was lacking, I'd say that Sirius > would have a very good idea of the support needed by a kid. Physical > needs? What are you saying here - that it wouldn't occur to Sirius > that Harry would need food, shelter, clothing? Or that he wouldn't > be able to handle a discussion about hormones? I don't understand > where that's coming from. > Sirius went into Azkaban in his early twenties and ever since he's been a physical and emotional disaster area. His only experience of childhood is probably the one he's still struggling through. When has he *ever* acted like a responsible adult? And I include in that the times before he went into Azkaban. > No experience coping or dealing with children. True, but lots of > first-time parents have none of that, either. And they have to tend > to all the needs of a newborn, not with a teen, who, at the very > least can articulate what needs are not being met. Unless you're > advocating that only those people who've tended to younger siblings, > or who have years of experience baby-sitting or who have an extended > family to help with child care should have children, then this falls > by the wayside. > I'm afraid you're falling into a false appreciation of the situation, don't worry, you're not alone - most of the Siriophiles are in the same situation. Is Harry a normal teenager? No, he is not. He is, so we have been told, the best hope of the WW for the destruction of Voldemort. That takes precedence above any nice, warm, cuddly feelings about "Oh, wouldn't it be nice..." Harry needs a Guardian in both senses of the word and in both senses of the word that guardian must be 100% reliable. Sirius has never been reliable. > But, as you've gone in that direction, yes, I think, had > Pettigrew been apprehended and the true story came out, Sirius would > have been cleared. And, in an effort to make up for their appalling > lack of justice, the MoM would have waived any punishment for the > illegal Animagus as long as Sirius registered. And, at some point, DD > would have stepped in and broken the news to Harry and Sirius about > the need for Harry to stay with the Dursleys. But,just as Harry has > been allowed to visit the Burrow, he could always have visited > Sirius. And I doubt he'd take up residence at Grimmauld Place, but > would have found somewhere else to live. So, yes, I think it could > have worked without Harry having to give up his protections. > > The Ministry would make sure that Sirius went back to Azkaban if they could possibly arrange it. Sirius *is* an unregistered Animagus. He would be charged and he is guilty. They would not let him off because they made a mistake the first time, but they might let him off if friends of Voldy suggested that it would bring Harry out into the open. Harry has carefully constructed protections at Privet Drive, blood ties that protect where other magic won't. What can Sirius offer? > Then Molly is once again misreading the situation. In the very first > chapter Harry smothers his impulse to go take on Dudley and his > friends, mentally acknowledging that his non-action would make Sirius > happy - that he, Harry, hadn't done anything rash. And then, of course, starts provoking Dudley when they're on their own before the Dementor attack. > Harry's actions > in the books may at times be interpreted as rash or impulsive, but no > where that I can recall does he leap blindly into action because he > wants to be a Junior Sirius or because he wants action for action's > sake or because he's looking for thrills. > > I don't get the impression at all that Harry finds Sirius a glamorous > figure or has unthinking admiration. He saw him first and foremost > as a link to his parents, particularly his father. In OoP, Harry > feels a great deal of empathy for Sirius because he sees them both in > similar situations - locked up, cut off, and having most of their > society believing awful things about them that are simply not true. > But nowhere in this did I see the sort of blind hero worship that you > see. > I contend that the male teenage viewpoint would be different. Teenage males don't do empathy. Admiration, hero-worship and emulation, yes. A link with his father? What does Harry know about his father? Can he even remember his father? Is he anything more than a concept that seems to engage other people's sympathies? Sirius can maybe tell him tales of the merry gang at Hogwarts, what fun they had. But it wouldn't last; Sirius' actions, or inaction at Godric's Hollow would be there. And in the mood that Harry is in, the first time they have a disagreement Harry will blame Sirius for the deaths of his parents, because he didn't do his duty. Reasonable? Maybe not, but in OoP Harry is not reasonable, he's looking for people to blame. > Me: > And, what a pretty picture you're painting of Molly - dumb and > shrewish ;-) No. Molly has my sympathy; she has a large family to worry about. A family that is keen on getting involved in the war and she fears, she knows, that some will die and she can do nothing about it. On top of that there is Harry. Permanently in danger, with no caring family, no one 'sensible' to talk to him, to keep him out of trouble. Molly would see Sirius and Harry as a pair to match Fudge and Percy. She may not be as bright as Hermione but she recognises the risks involved. > Me: > And, I do hope you're wrong about that. It's so cold-blooded to me, > even though I understand that sometimes the greater good takes > precedence over the wants/needs of individuals. Call me an old > softy, but I do hope that the final denouement of the series is not > going to reveal that many of those we thought were good were Evil! > and that DD is completely Machiavellian. Sometimes bad things happen > because they happen, not because every move everyone makes is a step > in some grand, pre-choreographed scheme... Yes, I understand your viewpoint, it's just that I see a difference between evil and pragmatism, and DD is pragmatic. He must be. He has to win, any way he can, and if that means casualties, well... he's seen friends and allies die before. He didn't like it, but he knows it's a war, not a game. > And Sirius > is back living in the house from hell, constrained from much > interaction with Harry, surrounded by people who have had actual > lives over the past 14 years, some of whom may only be accepting his > presence because Dumbledore has said they should trust him. Neither > Sirius or Molly is in a particularly comfortable position. This is a key point. How well does Sirius know Harry? And vice versa? Since he escaped the slammer, Sirius has been in Harry's company for about 3 hours, none of those under what could be called normal circumstances. They are total strangers to each other. They may be sympathetic, but that is no basis for full-out surrogate parenting mode. The Boggart tells us everything we need to know about how Molly feels - mostly helpless. She wants everybody to be safe, for the war to disappear, for DD to say that they can all go home, but she knows it won't happen, not before some very nasty things happen. Meanwhile Sirius sits in the kitchen bitching about not being in the fight. Not exactly Happy Families. Kneasy From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Nov 2 18:08:29 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 18:08:29 -0000 Subject: Sirius/Molly/Lupin as Guardians (Re: Dumbledore, Leader of ...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83985 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Molly has her feet on the ground, she recognises just how dangerous > Sirius would be as a guardian - you might as well hand Harry over to > the Malfoys. Sirius does not listen, he does not think, he only feels. > Molly also realises the unthinking admiration Harry has for Sirius, he > sees him as a glamorous figure to be admired and emulated - a very > dangerous mindset. Jen: You inject 'realism', I'll inject canon that gives Harry a little credit for contemplating Sirius with more than "unthinking admiration": "All right, all right, I've got the point," said Sirius. He looked most displeased. "Just an idea, thought you might like to get together--" "I would, I just don't want you chucked in Azkaban!" said Harry. (OOTP, US, chap 14, p. 305) "He {Harry} had a bad feeling about this parting; he did not know when they would see each other and felt that it was incumbent upon him to say something to Sirius to stop him doing anything stupid..." (OOTP, chap. 24, p. 523) And this last quote is right after Sirius gives Harry the two-way mirror: "Okay," said Harry, stowing the package away in the inside pocket of his jacket, but he knew he would never use whatever it was. It would not be he, Harry, who lured Sirius from his place of safety...." (OOTP, chap. 24, p. 523). Now maybe someone else sees unabashed hero worship in Harry's view of Sirius, but I don't. The bottom line is Harry doesn't need a guardian anymore by OOTP, Sirius, Molly, Dumbledore, whoever. Yes he needs guidance, support, sounding boards, etc. but he doesn't exactly get any of that, now does he? No, the wheels came off in OOTP and none of the adults did right by Harry. Sirius struggles with his "reckless behavior" and wanting Harry to be a friend; Molly struggles with smothering Harry and treating him like a child; and Dumbledore struggles with trying to protect Harry, thus not treating him as Voldemort's equal, which Harry has proven himself to be. They all try to balance their primal instincts and fail, IMO. In fact, I'd say Lupin is the only one who continually shows an ability to treat Harry with the dignity and respect of a surrogate parent. Lupin exhibits remarkable common-sense when dealing with Harry--he alone is able to hold Harry in his mind as both a teenager and the One with the Power. He can assist Harry with learning new skills and upbraid him for doing stupid things like going to Hogsmeade. He is able to withold information that might be hurtful to Harry (i.e., POA)and talk to Harry frankly when the situation calls for it (i.e, giving limited information on Voldemort in OOTP). He is also the one trying to keep the children safe in the MOM during the battle over the Prophecy, and restains Harry from entering the veil. Say what you will about Lupin and his inability to make stellar choices in his own life; in Harry's life he is a voice of reason and restraint, allowing Harry to be who he is. Lupin provides education and boundaries, keeps Harry safe when the situation calls for it, and allows him to take risks when the situation calls for *that*. A model that Molly, Sirius and Dumbledore would have done well to emulate in OOTP. From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Sun Nov 2 18:12:02 2003 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 13:12:02 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape & Harry's Memory Perspective Question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83986 Marianne: > What I'm curious about is the nature of perspective. When breaking > into another's mind, does the one breaking in see the memories with > the same perspective that the memories' owner sees? Or does the > Legilimens see the memory as if it were like thoughts trapped in a > Pensieve, where the perspective is that of an outside observer? When > Snape sees Harry's memories, is he seeing all the action from the > outside, or is he looking through Harry's eyes? Is he seeing the dog > barking and snapping at his own heels (as Harry would), looking down > from his perch into the upraised faces of the laughing Dursleys, or > is his point of view from off to the side? > > Since we're dealing with magic, perhaps a Legilimens does see > another's memories from the position of outside observer, rather > seeing these events the way the person who experienced remembers > them. But, if a Legilimens is gaining access to the memories exactly > as their target remembers them, then they would see it from the > target's perspective. If that's the case, then the memories Harry > got from Snape would also have been as seen through Snape's eyes. > And, that would mean that what Harry saw were events that Snape > himself had observed. Harry assumes he's seeing Snape, but maybe > that's not the case. Maybe Snape was neither the shouting man or the > frightened child, but someone who had just walked into the room to > see that. Snape could have been a sibling of the child in the > memory, for instance. I've never thought of that. My next question would be: If it wasn't Snape Harry saw in 'Snapes memories', wouldn't he have recognized that it was a different boy after actually seeing teenage-Snape in the pensieve? Unless Severus and said possible sibling looked extremely alike? ~Cassie~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 18:14:47 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 18:14:47 -0000 Subject: confirmation .. Hogwarts is in Scotland - MAPS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83987 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > bboyy_mn: > > > > Most of you have seen this already, but as the subject has come > > up, I will post it agian. > > > > Web link - Location of Peebles relative to nearest UK rail line- > > http://bluemoonmarket.homestead.com/Files/Hogwarts/UK-Rail1.htm > > > > ..., but Peebles hasn't had a rail link since the 1960s. IIRC, it > was on the old "Waverley Route" from Carlisle to Edinburgh which was > closed along with thousands of other miles of lines ... > > Any train heading northwards from Kings Cross to Scotland would > either follow the East Coast Main Line (ECML) into Edinburgh or > swing west at Newcastle across to Carlisle and pick up the WCML > through Lockerbie and Motherwell into Glasgow. > > Geoff: bboy_mn: Perhaps, this should be off-line; not sure. Oh well, crack on anyway. The rail line I highlighted on my map does not go through Peebles, it passes 27km west of Peebles, and although it takes several maps to determine it, I believe the rail line I highlighted does go through Carlisle and Lockerbie. I discounted the East Coast Main Line, because the books don't mention Hogwart Express passing though any major cities. Pretty hard to pass througth Glasgow or Edinburgh, and not notice it. And when I created the map I was specifically looking for the nearest major rail line to Peebles because someone in Peebles saw the flying Ford Anglia. I'm guessing Harry and Ron weren't flying directly above the rail line. So if the kept the rail line off to the side so they could see it easier and flew to the East of the tracks, they would have flown somewhere in the 27km space between the rail line and Peeble, and would have been insight of both locations. Essential, I am trying to construct a reality that conforms to the book. Given the location of major rail lines on the maps I have, it would seem difficult for anyone IN Peebles to get a good look at the flying car. On the other hand, if I must twist reality to fit fiction, it says the woman who saw the flying car was FROM Peebles, although I should probably check rather than rely on memory, it doesn't necessarily say she was IN Peebles at the time she saw the car. Just a thought. bboy_mn From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sun Nov 2 18:28:39 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 13:28:39 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape & Harry's Memory Perspective Question Message-ID: <6.1b36e48c.2cd6a6d7@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 83988 In a message dated 11/2/2003 12:43:04 PM Eastern Standard Time, Zarleycat at aol.com writes: What I'm curious about is the nature of perspective. When breaking into another's mind, does the one breaking in see the memories with the same perspective that the memories' owner sees? Or does the Legilimens see the memory as if it were like thoughts trapped in a Pensieve, where the perspective is that of an outside observer? When Snape sees Harry's memories, is he seeing all the action from the outside, or is he looking through Harry's eyes? Is he seeing the dog barking and snapping at his own heels (as Harry would), looking down from his perch into the upraised faces of the laughing Dursleys, or is his point of view from off to the side? Sherrie here: What we saw was not Snape's view of Harry's memories - it was HARRY's view of those memories. We never went inside Snape's head to see what HE saw. I rather thought that the person whose memories were accessed would experience his or her own perspective of the memory, while the person watching would do just that - observe. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sun Nov 2 18:37:16 2003 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 18:37:16 -0000 Subject: Molly-the coddler (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83989 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: (huge snip) > Laura: > > It's not like Harry went to Molly for advice at any point > throughout the 5 books. > > > Pippin: > > And that had to hurt. > > Laura replies: > > No one *ever* goes to Molly for advice. In the kitchen scene at GP, > everyone in the room, including her own husband, disagrees with > her. That should tell us something. > (snip) My reaction to that was to gasp-what an incredibly cruel and hurtful > thing to say! She accuses Sirius of confusing Harry with James. > Yet she confuses 15-year-old!Harry with a much younger Harry she > never even knew. She doesn't do any of the kids a service by > refusing to let them grow up just because the big world can be > scary. Guess what-it'll be that way whether kids are equipped to > handle it or not. Wouldn't a thoughtful parent want them to be > prepared for what they may face as teens and adults? I thought that > was what parenting was all about. Carolyn (just had to jump in here): As I follow this argument (and many others) about the dubious benefits of Molly's all-smothering mother-love (idly wonder if this is where the term 'smothering' came from), I am struck by the possibility that this is yet another clever JKR commentary on another strong theme in the books - Lily's loving sacrifice of her life for Harry. Despite arguments as to whether Lily knew what she was doing, or how or who did the actual protecting, we have been encouraged to approve of the mystical depth of this sacrifice, which is apparently keeping Harry alive to this day at Privet Drive. However, to my mind, Molly provides the counterpoint to this theme - that such all-embracing love can be a tiresome burden as well, and possibly have untoward consequences. Even Dumbledore admits he was wrong keeping Harry in the dark by the end of Oop, so Molly's judgement is questionable in the kitchen scene. She is coming across oddly like Percy in showing such blind loyalty to her leader. These are books about children growing up, and particularly for the boys involved, it has to be about cutting the apron strings. The great sadness for me about Sirius's death was exactly that he represented all the dangers Molly is so afraid of. Boys have got to do what boys have got to do, and all that. Much as Harry longs for his family, in my view, Molly represents yet another lesson for the poor kid that everything is not as it seems, and that mother-love might not be as wonderful as he imagines. From manawydan at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 2 19:24:03 2003 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 19:24:03 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Checks and balances References: <1067734723.9683.55532.m16@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000e01c3a176$e9046ca0$b5e66151@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 83990 Astrofiammante wrote: >So we have a system depicted where the executive - the Ministry of >Magic - has none of the checks and balances operating on it that >should be there, if we want to draw parallels with our own Muggle >world. I think that this is one of the messages which has been present all along on an "adult" level, that the WW is not governed, and does not work, in the same way as our own. Effectively, it's a pure bureaucracy. I don't agree with those who see there being some sort of formal relationship between the MoM and either the muggle PM or 'Er Maj - JKR makes is clear over and over that the WW is a seperate entity. Muggle rules do not apply, and the denizens of the WW don't seem to have a problem with that (apart from the Death Eaters, but they're certainly not trying to replace it with a democracy. To my mind, it's more evidence that the admixture of muggle born wizards is very small and their "outside" values about government and civil society aren't able to make any headway. >And we've seen some of the problems this can cause - when the >Ministry starts acting beyond its powers - Umbridge's behaviour at >Hogwarts and by sending the Dementors to Little Whinging, Fudge's >outrageous attempts to convict Harry wrongly of illegally using >magic, the lack of a completely free press in the form of a Daily >Prophet that can be unduly influenced by the Ministry. Quite so. And the big problem is that even those powers which seem to exist to control it are probably entirely ineffective. There are, as we know very well from Professor Binns's lectures, International Wizarding Congresses, which I'm sure are a supreme power which can tell the bureaucracy what to do. But you've probably spotted the obvious problem with an international congress. That is, who's likely to want to be involved in such a congress? Answer: those wizards who are interested in politics. But any wizard who is interested in getting involved in politics has only one outlet to do so: to go to work in the Ministry! So all the political wizards are involved in the bureaucracy already anyway and are unlikely to take any actions to undermine themselves. Dumbledore seems to be very much an exception to the general rule. Percy, for example, wants to be Minister. He joins the MoM. Conclusion: the Minister is normally drawn from the ranks of the senior bureaucracy. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From erinellii at yahoo.com Sun Nov 2 19:40:07 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 19:40:07 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83991 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Donna" wrote: > In our modern society, the connotation of Godparent is one of a > religious significance. Many years ago, though, that was the way of appointing the guardian of a child should something happen to the > parent. I suspect that it still carries that significance (sorry > about the spelling, just a little too sleepy to check) in the WW. I suspect the WW hasn't quite caught up with the times. I suspect that godparenting still carries the guardianship connotation in the WW. Heck, when I was 8 or so and had been watching Disney's Cinderella, I asked my mom what a Godmother did, and if I had one. She replied that my Godmother was my Aunt Beth, and that she would take care of me and my brother and sister if anything happened to both my Mom and Dad. I didn't realize it had any religous signifigance until many years later, and I've always thought of the role as another word for guardian. I suspect a lot of people in modern society who aren't overly religous do the same. Erin From mail at chartfield.net Sun Nov 2 17:06:55 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:06:55 -0000 Subject: Tube clues to whereabouts of Grimmauld Place (was London Locations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83992 >First June said: "My geographical siting of 12 Grimmauld Place was... either Hackney in North East London or Stoke Newington. Then Liz said: > "I believe it takes the kids and their escorts about 20 minutes to walk to Kings Cross Station on September 1, so Hackney and Stoke Newington are unlikely... More probable locations would be Kings Cross itself, Kentish Town, Angel/Islington, Camden Town." "12 Grimmauld Place has always had a 'posh gone to seed' element for me, especially considering the attitudes and snobbery of the Blacks, more inner-north-west than north-east." > Then Astrofiammante said: > Other possibilities would be Holborn, which has got some very posh bits but also some 'formerly posh bits' gone to seed, and which is close to Kings Cross. Also Clerkenwell or Farringdon? Then Astrofiammante had a few more thoughts some days later: (Anyone with the good fortune not to be familiar with the London Underground might find the maps at www.thetube.com useful) This is a long post, so apologies in advance. It occurs to me that we do have more information about the location of Grimmauld Place - what we can deduce from the Tube journey made by Harry and Arthur Weasley on the morning of Harry's hearing at the Ministry of Magic. In ch7 of OotP we hear that "the run-down streets were almost deserted, but when they arrived at the miserable little underground station they found it already full of early-morning commuters." This would probably rule out Kings Cross itself, which is obviously one of the biggest interchanges on the network. It would probably rule out a few other of the bigger stations as well - certainly it wouldn't describe Holborn or Farringdon stations, to my mind, which are large and busy. Next clue: "Five minutes later they were boarding an underground train that rattled them off towards the centre of London. Mr Weasley kept anxiously checking and re-checking the Underground Map above the windows. Four more stops, Harry ... Three stops left now ... Two stops to go, Harry ..." For one thing, it does not sound as if they changed lines - I'm not sure Arthur's heart could have stood the excitement, and we must have got some description of his pleasure at using escalators, etc. For another thing, it doesn't sound like a particularly long journey - perhaps about five stops out of central London? Then we read: "They got off at a station in the very heart of London, and were swept from the train in a tide of besuited men and women carrying briefcases." To my mind, the stations serving the "very heart of London" are on quite a small list, as follows: Charing Cross - Northern and Bakerloo line Piccadilly Circus - Piccadilly and Bakerloo lines Westminster - Jubilee line Leicester Square - Northern and Piccadilly lines Embankment - Northern, District and Circle lines. There are a few other peripheral ones like Green Park, Tottenham Court Road, St James's Park and Victoria which I considered including but rejected. I'm defining "the very heart of London" with a bias towards Westminster and the West End, because that's where the cultural and political institutions (and the Monarchy) are, and Harry and Arthur are travelling to the Ministry of Magic, after all. (I'm not really thinking of The City here, which is the geographical heart of London, and which you'd have to consider if JKR had mentioned commerce. It is also quite a focus of the transport network because it's where people work. But it doesn't fit JKR's description, and I don't think it's where the MoM is.) So, what districts are about five stops back up each of these Tube lines from central London but still within 20 mins' walk of Kings Cross? Jubilee - Northbound you're off to north west London, as suggested by Liz. You could certainly include Swiss Cottage, possibly West Hampstead or even Kilburn at a stretch. These are in Camden - the same London Borough as Kings Cross - but it's a goodish walk across to the station. Southbound is unpromising, being a fairly rapid trip out to Docklands. Piccadilly - To my mind this is right out going westbound. Knightsbridge and Kensington are all wrong, and just not within walking distance of Kings Cross. Eastbound takes you straight towards Kings Cross. Caledonian Road - Holloway, Barnsbury, N7, the district around Pentonville Prison, sounds rather promising. Northern - We are told the train 'rattled' - particularly evocative of the Northern line! Northbound you'd get to Camden Town or Kentish Town, which was certainly two of the districts suggested, although possibly a bit upmarket in places? Also Chalk Farm, which I'm not too familiar with. You're within easy walking distance of Kings Cross here. Southbound it's Stockwell, Clapham and Tooting - far too long a walk. Bakerloo - Northbound, Marylebone and Edgware Road would suit the description admirably from the point of view of the district, but they're a bit far from Kings Cross and both are major stations rather than "miserable little" ones. Southbound is too far away from Kings Cross. District - Eastbound and you're in The City which is not a residential neighbourhood, or anywhere near Kings Cross. Westbound takes you back towards Kensington - already ruled out Circle - identical to the District. So it seems from this that we could try looking at the following neighbourhoods for Grimmauld Place (helpful map website is www.streetmap.co.uk, use 'London Street' function): Swiss Cottage NW8 - maybe a bit too upmarket? West Hampstead, Kilburn NW6 - good, but a long walk to KC Holloway, Caledonian Road, Barnsbury - seems to me to fit all criteria Camden Town, Kentish Town, Tuffnell Park, Chalk Farm - around NW5/NW7, as above So that gives us N7, NW5, NW7. Rather looks like Liz was spot on in her original post, doesn't it? But to subject this to a little scrutiny, let's briefly work from the other direction - what likely-sounding stations are there that we haven't looked at? Angel - because the Northern Line is divided into two branches (Charing Cross branch and City branch), the journey from here into central London would require a change at one of the really busy stations like Kings Cross or Euston - doesn't seem to fit the description really. Same goes for Old Street. Farringdon - I thought this district fitted the bill, but it's a big station serving four different lines so I can't reconcile this with the station description and the journey doesn't work. Barbican - neighbourhood is all wrong, journey doesn't work Russell Square - both journeys work but Grimmauld Place doesn't sound like it's in Bloomsbury to me. Goodge Street and Warren Street - journey works but this is a very busy district around Tottenham Court Road, which I don't associate with being massively run-down. Holborn/Chancery Lane - doesn't fit station description Great Portland Street/Euston Square - these work in every regard except the Tube journey - especially the "miserable little underground station" one, because the stations really are tiny and cramped. But... no straightforward route into "the heart of London". Somers Town or St Pancras would be good neighbourhoods, but you'd get on the Northern Line at Euston to go into central London, which is a mainline station well known to JKR - it's the one she mixed up with Kings Cross, after all - and not a "miserable little" station. Hang on... what if she mixed up the Kings Cross and Euston districts too? No, let's not even go there... ;- )) All comments/criticisms/additions of bits of local knowledge very welcome. > > www.deadjournal.com/users/astrofiammante From mail at chartfield.net Sun Nov 2 17:59:15 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:59:15 -0000 Subject: Wizard government (was wizards and the queen) In-Reply-To: <002f01c3a141$23c40160$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83993 Debbie wrote: > The Wizengamot may be the technical equivalent of the judiciary, but in fact they appear to function solely as a jury substitute, as it's very clear that DMLE, and ultimately Fudge himself, controls trial proceedings. Fudge also seems to control who serves on the Wizengamot, since he was able to demote Dumbledore from his position as Chief Warlock. > The Daily Prophet refers to the Educational Decrees as "new laws" that were "passed" by "the Ministry of Magic". To me, a "decree" sounds more like an edict (or regulation) issued by an executive than a piece of legislation passed by a legislature. Sometimes I think this is an example of JKR showing how arbitrary WW government is, but it may just be sloppy usage of language by someone who is not schooled in the law. >The Decree was passed at night. If there was a real legislature (and I don't think the International Confederation of Wizards is it because the MoM is not an international organization) how much notice was given to likely dissenters... And, very telling, "Wizengamot elders Griselda Marchbanks and Tiberius Ogden have resigned in protest." Really, there doesn't seem to be time for any real legislative process. Educational Decree No. 24, the one that authorized Umbridge to disband all student organizations, was apparently issued on a Sunday (the day after the meeting at the Hogs Head). It seems to me that Fudge effectively controls the legislature -- even if it exists -- if he can call a session and arrange for selective notice in order to pass decrees to increase his own power to engage in micromanagement. The Daily Prophet gave us a hint of that when it stated (regarding ED No. 23) that *Fudge* (not the legislature) "has used new laws to effect improvements". Now Astrofiammante again: Thanks for your very interesting response. What interests me here (as so often) is the gap between what is described and what actually happens. When we first hear about the structure of the Ministry of Magic, it seems fair to assume it is constituted along the same lines as our own government. There's a minister in charge, who seems quite an innocuous chap, and a lot of civil servants who work for him. So far so good. It's all a bit bureaucratic, but that doesn't seem anything out of the ordinary. He must have a certain amount of respectability if the Muggle Prime Minister will deal with him. As the series goes on, we find some of our assumptions are wrong. We start to notice sizeable gaps between the expectations set up by this familiar situation and the actual experiences of the characters. We learn that justice in the wizarding world is not the impartial matter that we expect in our own society, despite having the external trappings of such justice - a courtroom with a presiding officer, a jury in the case of the Pensieve trials. We have also deduced that Fudge is likely to be ruling by decree than by the consent of any sort of wizarding body, despite expectations at least on my part that a system constituted with an executive and a judiciary would also have a legislature. What interests me is the question of how this system of government developed in the first place. It strikes me that there are a few possibilities: 1) There are some discussions going on elsewhere on the board seeking to establish how much the wizarding world developed from a 'mediaeval' model in the way we understand it from our own history. Certainly there are a few traditions, legends and artefacts lying about - the story of the founding of Hogwarts, the castle building, swords and suits of armour, the existence of a privileged aristocratic class. Well, the mediaeval model of government was monarchy. Did the wizarding world ever have a monarchy of its own? And if not, how was it governed? Was there ever any kind of revolution? Or did the wizarding population simply come under the auspices of Muggle government until, say, an excess of witch- and wizard-burning caused it to break away? I have read elsewhere on this board the interesting opinion that the wizarding world has shades of a society that never experienced an 'age of enlightenment' in terms of the rights of the individual. How would this affect the formation, or lack of formation of views of things like the right to representation or to universal suffrage that we take for granted? 2) The government of the wizarding world was set up on the lines that we understand from our own history and it has become corrupted. Institutions like a legislative body and an independent judiciary did at one time exist, but have been done away with, or have withered through apathy and lack of participation. The current system has grown up to fill the gaps. 3) The wizarding world saw no reason to bugger about with representation and was perfectly content with the concept of an oligarchic government run by an appointee like Fudge. Things were going along just fine until that nasty Voldemort came along and forced him to behave unreasonably. - - - - - - - - - - What elements in the history of the wizarding world may have had a bearing on the present form of government? Once again, we are back to the biggest fact we know - Dumbledore's defeat of Grindelwald in 1945. It's hard to believe, given what was happening in Muggle history at this time, that the choice of date by JKR was accidental. Was the Ministry of Magic system of government put into place to overcome the problems caused by the last Evil Overlord to come along, but has now become inflexible, corrupted and outlived its usefulness? A kind of 'war cabinet' that was never stood down? What a lot of very entertaining, and fascinating, speculation! Thanks again for your very intelligent reply to my original post. One thing I am sure of, however. I don't think the wizarding world would have much truck at all with interference from the Muggle government, as has been discussed in the other 'trouser leg' of this thread. I think, if it came down to the wire, wizards would turn out to value their autonomy very highly indeed. From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 2 20:36:31 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 20:36:31 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts is in Scotland (longish) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83994 I would like to add my few pennyworth to the discussion about Hogwarts and its location. I think there is enough evidence in canon for the school to be located in Scotland. Firstly, main line trains departing from Kings Cross are heading up the East Coast Main Line (ECML). If they continue straight up the line and are not swinging off to Leeds or Bradford or Hull, then the journey will lead to York, Newcastle and ultimately Edinburgh from where a train could go on to Glasgow and beyond. I have already noted that the Ford Anglia in COS was spotted over London (the Post Office Tower), Norfolk ( a county to the east of the ECML) and Peebles ( a town to the south of Edinburgh and also south of the railway line) and that an extrapolated line from the latter two points heads you into the West Highlands. While I was putting this post together, bboy came back with message 83987. The line he refers to as passing through Carlisle and Lockerbie is the West Coast Main Line (WCML) which /does/ go into Glasgow. you cannot easily avoid Edinburgh or Glasgow if you are travelling through by rail with the Highlands as your aim. Referring back to Peebles, COS says "Mr. Angus Fleet of Peebles..." I think that the implication is that he was in his home town. I see no reason why the Anglia shouldn't have flown over. If they were heading in the direction of the Highlands, they had obviously wobbled off course over Norfolk but setting a general course could take them that way. we do know from COS that the Ford had a compass fitted. There is also the feeling that Hogwarts is in an isolated location. There are not many really isolated areas in England and Wales. Even in the Lake District, which contains England's highest mountains and in Snowdonia in Wales, you are never an incredible distance from roads and "civilisation". There is a problem here in connection with the Hogwarts Express. One gets the impression from canon that Hogsmeade station is a terminus. Once you get north of the main industrial belt, say the Glasgow- Edinburgh axis and as far as Perth, the rail lines north of here have only a limited number of termini ? Oban, Mallaig, Kyle of Lochalsh on the western side. All of these are reasonably sized towns. Hogsmeade is described as having a tiny platform; does the Wizarding World have its own magic line which leaves the Muggle main line somewhere to reach Hogsmeade? Sitting and thinking over my own visits to the Highlands, I settled on two possibilities for areas compared to bboy's four. Rannoch Moor is certainly one of them. It is remote, a largish area (by UK standards) with just a few roads acorss the middle, boggy with a minimal population. A second, even more remote locality for Hogwarts might be the area of land including the Knoydart peninsula which lies north of the A830 Fort William-Mallaig road and the parallel rail line and south of the A87 Sheil Bridge-Kyle of Lochalsh road and rail line. It includes the notorious Loch Hourn (the Loch of Hell) and there are virtually no roads at all in the area. Putting aside the problem of the rail link, this would be an area only visited by hardy tourists prepared for climbing or rough terrain walking and not for the faint hearted Muggle. Other points which have arisen include the name of Hogwarts. Remember that Hogwarts, although founded 1000 years ago, is a new institution grafted on to the area and wouldn't necessarily have a Scots sounding name and bboy again suggested that Hogsmeade developed as an adjunct to the school. There are also genuine Scottish places which do not sound in the least Scottish ? Fowlis Wester, Dollar and Dull for example. On the question of "lake" versus "loch". bboy is wrong in his assumption about lochs which are Scottish lakes; they can be completely inland such as Loch Lomond - if open to the sea, such as Loch Hourn it is a sea-loch. Bear in mind that very few Hogwarts students are Scots and have little interaction with the local population. Therefore, they might well refer to the loch at Hogwarts as "the lake". As parallel examples, in the Lake District in England, there is only one Lake ? Lake Windermere; all the others are "waters" ? Coniston Water for example but are always referred to in conversation as "lakes". Similarly in my own neck of the woods, streams and rivers are often (wait for it!) "waters" but are referred to by us as "streams" or "rivers". So, I would join with bboy, Astrofiammante and Kirstini is putting my money on Hogwarts being in the Scottish Highlands. All I need is for someone to find the relevant spell for building a railway branch line and my day will be made! Geoff From Zarleycat at aol.com Sun Nov 2 21:39:10 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 21:39:10 -0000 Subject: Snape & Harry's Memory Perspective Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83995 > Marianne: > > > What I'm curious about is the nature of perspective. When breaking > > into another's mind, does the one breaking in see the memories with > > the same perspective that the memories' owner sees? Or does the > > Legilimens see the memory as if it were like thoughts trapped in a > > Pensieve, where the perspective is that of an outside observer? When > > Snape sees Harry's memories, is he seeing all the action from the > > outside, or is he looking through Harry's eyes? Is he seeing the dog > > barking and snapping at his own heels (as Harry would), looking down > > from his perch into the upraised faces of the laughing Dursleys, or > > is his point of view from off to the side? > > > > Since we're dealing with magic, perhaps a Legilimens does see > > another's memories from the position of outside observer, rather > > seeing these events the way the person who experienced remembers > > them. But, if a Legilimens is gaining access to the memories exactly > > as their target remembers them, then they would see it from the > > target's perspective. If that's the case, then the memories Harry > > got from Snape would also have been as seen through Snape's eyes. > > And, that would mean that what Harry saw were events that Snape > > himself had observed. Harry assumes he's seeing Snape, but maybe > > that's not the case. Maybe Snape was neither the shouting man or the > > frightened child, but someone who had just walked into the room to > > see that. Snape could have been a sibling of the child in the > > memory, for instance. Cassie: > I've never thought of that. My next question would be: If it wasn't Snape > Harry saw in 'Snapes memories', wouldn't he have recognized that it was a > different boy after actually seeing teenage-Snape in the pensieve? > Unless Severus and said possible sibling looked extremely alike? At this point, Harry had not yet invaded Snape's pensieve, so he hadn't seen teenaged Snape. Which makes it all the more reasonable that he'd immediately assume the teen and child he saw in these memories was Snape. By the time Harry did wander through the Pensieve, the idea that the boy he saw in Snape's memories really was Snape was already set in stone in Harry's opinion. I accepted upon first and second readings that this was the case, too. But, now I have that problem of perception. If one's memories are being accessed directly from one's mind, it still makes the most sense to me that those past moments would be seen exactly as the person who experienced them perceived the action. We'll have to wait and see if anything more comes of this, or if this is simply proof I need to spend time thinking about other things! Marianne From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 2 21:29:48 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 21:29:48 -0000 Subject: Tube clues to whereabouts of Grimmauld Place (was London Locations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83996 Looking at Astrofiammante's suggestions, I am inclined to agree with her theory that the Northern Line is a possibility. Bearing in mind that OOTP was 1995, the line would be using its old stock and it had a reputation of being a pretty bad line. Looking at the fact that someone recently put up the idea that the MOM might be in the same zone as the main Real World Ministry district, a likely dropping off station would be Charing Cross; it's just a few minutes walk around the corner of Trafalgar Square into Whitehall. Looking at the time taken on the Hogwarts Express day, another area worthy of note would be around Mornington Crescent, which I seem to recall is rush hours only nowadays. Looking at my map of London, walking as a group would probably be slower and I think Chalk Farm or Camden Town would be a bit far. The Mornington Crescent area is also pretty seedy and run down. Geoff From Zarleycat at aol.com Sun Nov 2 21:43:55 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 21:43:55 -0000 Subject: Snape & Harry's Memory Perspective Question In-Reply-To: <6.1b36e48c.2cd6a6d7@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83997 Marianne: > What I'm curious about is the nature of perspective. When breaking > into another's mind, does the one breaking in see the memories with > the same perspective that the memories' owner sees? Or does the > Legilimens see the memory as if it were like thoughts trapped in a > Pensieve, where the perspective is that of an outside observer? When > Snape sees Harry's memories, is he seeing all the action from the > outside, or is he looking through Harry's eyes? Is he seeing the dog > barking and snapping at his own heels (as Harry would), looking down > from his perch into the upraised faces of the laughing Dursleys, or > is his point of view from off to the side? > Sherrie repliied: > > What we saw was not Snape's view of Harry's memories - it was HARRY's view of > those memories. We never went inside Snape's head to see what HE saw. > > I rather thought that the person whose memories were accessed would > experience his or her own perspective of the memory, while the person watching would do > just that - observe. Now me: But Snape did see "flashes" of this. He says so himself and then asks Harry to whom the dog belonged. So Snape obviously "saw" something. Marianne From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net Sun Nov 2 21:50:29 2003 From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 21:50:29 -0000 Subject: Evil! McGonagall Revisited (WAS: Who Will Betray the Order?) In-Reply-To: <011a01c39ed5$106b5c80$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 83998 Debbie said: > <). And I wouldn't put it past her to try and fake us out now. So, I'm thinking that one of the reasons she introduced Umbridge was to obscure some of the characterizations she built up in earlier books. Oh, certainly Umbridge had her own part to play in the storyline. But she also created a very interesting dynamic at Hogwarts during the OoP year, and I think JKR exploited that to misdirect and confuse us about the true motivations of the characters at Hogwarts. I think it's worthwhile to consider what characterizations in OoP match with those in previous books, and which ones seemed to drastically change when Umbridge appeared on the scene. I think that McGonagall went through some changes in OoP, and I'm not at all convinced this is just her "coming into her own." You see, I truly believe that someone we know and are supposed to love and trust in these books will prove to be a betrayer in the end. It might not be someone at Hogwarts (if not, my favourite candidates are Lupin or Molly), but if it *is* someone at Hogwarts, JKR has made it more difficult to suspect any of the Hogwarts professors who joined together with the students so brilliantly against Umbridge. Common enemy and all that . . . but Umbridge was apparently *not* a death eater, so there is no reason to assume someone secretly working for Voldemort wouldn't hate Umbridge just as much as the folks loyal to Dumbledore did. As Debbie has already pointed out elsewhere, Evil!McGonagall has just as much reason to hate Umbridge as anyone. So now, I'm starting to wonder if I wasn't too hasty in ditching Evil!McGonagall purely on her reaction to Umbridge. I think JKR wanted to throw us off the track . . . and by letting McGonagall be spunky and stand up to Umbridge as she did (and even take several stunning spells in the chest for her efforts), JKR has made McGonagall look like a hero. Sure, she was great against Umbridge. But I'm not fooled - I can see right through this little game. McGonagall is evil. Just wait and see. :-) Wendy From Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk Sun Nov 2 18:24:12 2003 From: Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk (Robert Shaw) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 18:24:12 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wizards and the Queen References: Message-ID: <167401c3a18d$f4544550$749c87d9@robertft56e9wi> No: HPFGUIDX 83999 sachmet96 wrote: >> lola again... >> why then has the magical Prime Minister not been mentioned? > > sachmet96 > Because there was no need to mention the magical Prime Minister. It > was an anouncement of the Ministry (which he would be part of). So > imo only the Muggle one has to be mentioned who is not part of the > Ministry. > > I see the title Minister of Magic equivalent/similar to a president > of state, who in some countries does have very far reaching > privileges. > Prime Minister is a more senior title than plain Minister. If there were a magical Prime Minister Fudge would, in law, just be the PMs appointee. In practice, Fudge could be the head of government and the hypothetical magical PM head of state, but in that case the PM should have been mentioned by now. Also, while Fudge clearly is the de facto head of government, he doesn't feel like a head of state. Minister of Magic is not a suitable title for an head of state. It implies the existence of other ministers, and of a leader to organise them all. If Fudge were head of state he'd be more likely to be called something like the Lord High Wizard or the Supreme Master, titles which have no connection with muggle society. In law Fudge is probably an apppointee of the crown, who will be head of state, but in practice wizarding society's loyalty will have long since become purely nominal. -- Robert From t.forch at mail.dk Sun Nov 2 23:31:43 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:31:43 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hogwarts is in Scotland (longish) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031103003059.0327dea0@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 84000 At 20:36 02-11-03 +0000, Geoff Bannister wrote: >I would like to add my few pennyworth to the discussion about >Hogwarts and its location. > >I think there is enough evidence in canon for the school to be >located in Scotland. I was surprised to learn that there is still any discussion ... ? http://www.hogwarts-library.net/reference/potterverse_faq.html#Hogwarts_where Troels From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 3 00:28:19 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:28:19 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84001 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > Oh, dear. > Can we inject a bit of realism in here please? > Just what sort of surrogate parent would Sirius be? > > We have Dumbledore's assessment: "you were coming to regard Sirius as a mixture of father and brother." In real life, that's a recipe for disaster. There are all sorts of workable parenting styles, from strict to permissive, but no parent can succeed if there is any confusion about just who is the parent and who is the child. Harry keeps having to parent Sirius, trying to keep him from coming back to Britain in GoF, getting between Sirius and Snape when they quarrel in OOP, swearing not to use the gift because he doesn't want Sirius to do anything foolish. And Sirius *is* rash even in GoF: using showy non-native birds to send messages to Harry, rushing back to Britain with no clear idea of what he'll do when he gets there, breaking into a house to use the fireplace (as we learn in OOP, there are alternatives), letting himself be seen as a dog in Hogsmeade though, as OOP makes clear, Peter could have outed him at any time, starving himself to the point where he'll eat rats. Molly has trouble letting go and respecting the boundaries of her adult children. It's telling that all three of her grown sons found ways to distance themselves from the Burrow. But Sirius had trouble letting go of his own child self, and he could never have been a successful parent as long as he wanted to treat Harry as a pal. Pippin From jamesredmont at hotmail.com Mon Nov 3 00:36:58 2003 From: jamesredmont at hotmail.com (James Redmont) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:36:58 -0000 Subject: Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84002 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" wrote: > > > Remember in OoP, Harry learned the secret of 12 Grimmauld Place not > by word of mouth but by memorizing a piece of paper. Dumbledore did > not have to be face to face with Pettigrew to be in on the secret. > All Peter would have to do is write a little note to Dumbledore. > And if he disguised his handwriting, how would Dumbledore know it > was Peter rather than Sirius? > > KathyK, who would like to elaborate but must go to work instead. James Redmont: This is how I think it works. Sirius knew where the Potter's house was. But when the Fidelius Charm was in effect, the house simply dissapeared to all except the secret keep and the Potters themselves, just like at Grimmauld Place. So maybe when the Potters (who were the enchanters) died, the spell was broken and when Hagrid, Sirius, etc. went to the house, it had appeared again. James Redmont From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Nov 3 00:45:36 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 19:45:36 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape & Harry's Memory Perspective Question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84003 In a message dated 11/2/2003 4:45:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, Zarleycat at aol.com writes: > I rather thought that the person whose memories were accessed would > experience his or her own perspective of the memory, while the person watching would do > just that - observe. Now me: But Snape did see "flashes" of this. He says so himself and then asks Harry to whom the dog belonged. So Snape obviously "saw" something. Marianne Sherrie (the redhead in the corner) again: Yes, Snape saw what Harry saw - but from a different perspective. Harry saw it as a participant - rather as a play would appear to one of the actors onstage. Sev, however, saw it as would a member of the audience - as Harry saw Snape's memories. Sorry if I didn't make this clear before! Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 3 01:20:54 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 01:20:54 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts is in Scotland (longish) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031103003059.0327dea0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84004 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Troels Forchhammer wrote: > At 20:36 02-11-03 +0000, Geoff Bannister wrote: > >I would like to add my few pennyworth to the discussion about > >Hogwarts and its location. > > > >I think there is enough evidence in canon for the school to be > >located in Scotland. > > I was surprised to learn that there is still any discussion ... ? > > http://www.hogwarts-library.net/reference/potterverse_faq.html#Hogwarts_where > > Troels bboy_mn: Well, the consensus seems to be Scotland; the questions is WHERE in Scotland. Of course the answer is in FICTIONAL Scotland, however, we are searching for places based on real world geography that are likely or at least, potentially capable of hiding a place like Hogwarts. I get all my information from Maps and Books. The satellite images on my website are from a program called '3D-Atlas' that is available in CD-ROM bargain bins around the world for less than $10. Although, I also use Frommer's Map of Britain by Batholomew Mapping Services, Zagat Map of London, Collins London Map, 'Pictoral Atlas of the World' pub by Tormont in Canada, as well as www.multimaps.com which has aerial photo maps of Britian, and www.maps24.com which allows you to use JAVA scripts to make distance measurements and has very good street maps showing the direction of one way streets. Geoff Bannister on the other hand has been there (and currently is there) and has had the honor of treading upon those hollowed grounds. We must, therefore, lend a great credibility to that. Durmstang- Surely the Russian Murmansk peninsula just east of Northern Finland. Beauxbatons- Many presume that Beauxbatons is not in France, but in Andorra which is a small principality in the south, on the border between France and Spain. This idea is re-enforce by the fact that the area is referred to as 'The Magic Mountains'. Regardless, that area of the southern Spain/France border is a very likely area. Can I prove that? No! But all three locations fit the books very closely. Just a thought. bboy_mn From evil_sushi2003 at hotmail.com Sun Nov 2 09:17:38 2003 From: evil_sushi2003 at hotmail.com (evil_sushi2003) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 09:17:38 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84006 Laura: > Yes, Molly and Arthur have been generous and loving to Harry. > That doesn't mean that they have formal responsibility for him > or that they have any "rights" in him. If you care about your > kid's friends and offer them affection and support, does that > mean you then have "rights" over them? Of course not. Sirius > was exactly correct. Molly was overstepping her bounds. Pippin: > But she has to put up with Sirius grumbling about Dumbledore > all the time not to mention whatever wild talk Sirius indulged > in. Probably hatching one halfbaked scheme after another to spring > Harry from the Dursleys without Dumbledore's permission or lam > it with him from the Ministry ditto. E.S I would have to say that in GOF when Harry asks Sirius if he can stay with him, Sirius behaves a little shifty on this, and IMO it's probably because DD has told him of the protection. Sirius has never made any 'halfbaked scheme' to try and spring Harry from the Dursleys. He asked Harry to stay with him when he believed that Pettigrew would be caught, when he knew nothing of the protection, when he thought he would be free. From the point that Sirius thinks that he can be cleared, all he wants to do is protect James' son, and treat him as if he were his own. Laura: > It's not like Harry went to Molly for advice at any > point throughout the 5 books. Pippin: > And that had to hurt. Laura replies: > No one *ever* goes to Molly for advice. In the kitchen scene at > GP, everyone in the room, including her own husband, disagrees > with her. That should tell us something. > > > Here's the canon on that discusion: > > "'He's not your son', said Sirius quietly. > 'He's as good as,' said Mrs. Weasley fiercely. Who else has he > got?' > 'He's got me!' > 'Yes,' said Mrs. Weasley, her lip curling. The thing is, it's > been rather difficult for you to look after him while you've been > locked up in Azkaban, hasn't it?'" (OoP p. 90 US) ES >From the word 'quietly' I assume that Sirius didn't say this with aggressive emotion, more rather just stated it, as if to warn Molly politely that he has parental rights over Harry, and that she is overstepping hers, and just to remind Molly that other people care about Harry, noy just herself. Sirius didn't get angry, rash or start yelling, as he does when we know he's angry (think of that confrontation with Snape). Whereas Molly, who thinks that she is solely responsible for Harry and is the only one who cares for him brings up predjudices against Sirius that she knows areunfounded, and the reason for this is that she wants to hurt him, because she is jealous. (IMO) Laura: > My reaction to that was to gasp-what an incredibly cruel and > hurtful thing to say! She accuses Sirius of confusing Harry with > James. Yet she confuses 15-year-old!Harry with a much younger > Harry she never even knew. She doesn't do any of the kids a service > by refusing to let them grow up just because the big world can be > scary. Guess what-it'll be that way whether kids are equipped to > handle it or not. Wouldn't a thoughtful parent want them to be > prepared for what they may face as teens and adults? I thought > that was what parenting was all about. ES I have to say that I'm getting tired of Molly's control-freakish attitude. She doesn't seem to realise that Harry, Herm, her own children, can actually think for themselves. I totally agree that she is shoving her proverbial oar into Sirius's business. I compare her attitude to that of Umbridge, and although for different reasons (Umbridge controlls as she wants to protect Fudge and the Ministry, whereas Molly controlls as she wants to protect Harry et all), both have been painful to Harry. (Umbridge for obvious reasons), and Molly, because if she had let Sirius explain more to Harry, then IMO, Harry would have a better understanding of what was happening to him, and what Voldy was planning. IMO It is always more beneficial to have an idea what your enemy is planning, but Molly (and DD to an extent) shelters Harry far to much. She wants to protect him, but she doesn't realise that he doesn't need protection, and as he had already proved himself 4 times, more than most of the aurors, if not all, and more than Molly herself most probably. IMO Sirius supports the DA, whereas I doubt Molly's reaction would be anything than supportive. Sirius wants Harry to experience life, and as he had so much fun breaking rules with MWP, he just wants Harry to have an experience that he would enjoy. Harry is all Sirius had left of his best friend, I'm pretty sure that he knows Harry isn't James, and it's quite obvious that he wouldn't support Harry in anything that could endanger him. Sirius cares about Harry, and probably a whole lot more than Molly, who never talks to Harry person to person, and only bustles about him. (Define that, she doesn't talk to Harry about his secrets, his beliefs, whereas Sirius talks to Harry like a friend, not like a friend's mum who cares a lot for him) I also think that Sirius is the only person in OotP who truly knows what Harry is feeling. Harry feels angered that he isn't told anything, IMO, he feels trapped, and that his freedom has been taken (at school, by Umbridge, in the holidays by Dursleys, in Grimmauld place by Mrs Weasley). Molly even goes to the extent of stopping outside the bedroom door to make sure that they weren't discussing things. I find that creepy to say the least. Hoping JK will cop-off Molly sometime soon... evil_sushi From mail at chartfield.net Sun Nov 2 21:51:53 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 21:51:53 -0000 Subject: Tube clues to whereabouts of Grimmauld Place (was London Locations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84007 >Geoff Bannister" wrote: Someone recently put up the idea that the MOM might be in the same zone as the main Real World Ministry district, a likely dropping off station would be Charing Cross; it's just a few minutes walk around the corner of Trafalgar Square into Whitehall. Looking at the time taken on the Hogwarts Express day, another area worthy of note would be around Mornington Crescent, which I seem to recall is rush hours only nowadays. Looking at my map of London, walking as a group would probably be slower and I think Chalk Farm or Camden Town would be a bit far. The Mornington Crescent area is also pretty seedy and run down. Then Astrofiammante: I don't know if you listen to the quiz show "I'm Sorry, I Haven't a Clue..." on Radio Four at all, but if the object of the game is to be the first to shout 'Mornington Crescent' and so win, then I think you've claimed victory... ;- )) But seriously, a fine suggestion, I think. Also, it is a pretty small station, in a grotty area, as I recall, and one that gets fiendishly crowded first thing. Astrofiammante From park0188 at flinders.edu.au Sun Nov 2 22:17:42 2003 From: park0188 at flinders.edu.au (Richard Parker) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 08:47:42 +1030 Subject: The Black dog In-Reply-To: <1067770463.4594.56546.m12@yahoogroups.com> References: <1067770463.4594.56546.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <1067811462.3fa58286c673b@imap.flinders.edu.au> No: HPFGUIDX 84008 Hi guys, not sure if this has been picked up yet, but Winston Churchill once famously described his depression as 'the black dog'. Sirius' animagnus form is obviously a black dog. Thus, Harry may slide into depression due to Sirius' death. Just a thought! -- Richard Parker 3rd year Archaeology Student (Historical stream), Flinders University, Adelaide. "It is our choices Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -Albus Dumbledore From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Mon Nov 3 00:33:58 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (Oona ) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 00:33:58 -0000 Subject: Snape & Harry's Memory Perspective Question and then some In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84009 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" wrote: > What I'm curious about is the nature of perspective. When breaking > into another's mind, does the one breaking in see the memories with > the same perspective that the memories' owner sees? Or does the > Legilimens see the memory as if it were like thoughts trapped in a > Pensieve, where the perspective is that of an outside observer? This is an excellent question. When I read OoP, ( one of the many times ) I had a similar thought, but then I thought about my own memories and in some of them when I look back to childhood, I can see the entire scene, in others, I am just looking through my own eyes. So when thinking about the perspectives of the memories, I assumed that the same could hold true for someone looking into them from the outside. What I thought was even more interesting was Harry's reaction to everything he saw in Snape's memories and in the Pensieve. I thought it a bit odd that he still failed to show much compassion to Snape. When I read Snape's memories of childhood and school, I felt as though many of my former theories on Snape were correct. I have been steadfast that he was in some ways abused, and the memories confirmed that enough for me. What struck me as odd was that Harry a victim of neglect and maltreatment - not only from the Dursleys, but from the likes of Malfoy and his cronies and at many points much of the school- could not recognise a little bit of himself in Snape. His immediate reaction to his father's behaviour aside, I still thought that perhaps, as Harry is growing older, he would have recognised that Snape's attitudes towards him and others were borne out of this wretched past we see in his memories. It seems to me that there is still hope for Harry and Snape to forge some kind of neutral relationship based on this. I am still of the opinion that Snape is only a Slytherin because of what was instilled in his mind growing up. Coming to Hogwarts with more knowledge of the Dark Arts and Hexes and Curses than anyone else- - he obviously learned this at home. This mirrors Malfoy... Would Malfoy have grown into the detestable little toad that he is were Lucius and Narcissa not so awful? Harry knows that Dumbledore trusts Snape for his own reasons. Snape's reaction to Harry's continued lack of concern for rules or other's privacy in stoppping Occlumency Lessons was a mistake, but it was the mistake of an angry tortured man. There is the argument that Snape should just grow up and let go of the past, but he isn't that evolved yet. Will Harry ever see eye to eye with Snape? Will they ever be able to look at one another without hatred? Opinions? Tonks, your Scot in America, formerly known as Snuffles whose entire network was destroyed in our recent Hurricane and who lost her place on the list and is ever so happy to be back. From elfundeb at comcast.net Mon Nov 3 02:34:48 2003 From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 21:34:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius & Molly (WAS: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) References: Message-ID: <001001c3a1b3$0d6d7140$9ddc5644@arlngt01.va.comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 84010 Laura: It just seems to me that Molly has an attitude in her dealings with Sirius, and I wonder if it might not be just a bit of jealousy. [snip] [Harry] shows an intensity of feeling toward Sirius that he never shows toward Molly. Maybe it's natural that Molly should be hurt by this, but any parent who takes this sort of thing from a teenager personally is asking for hurt feelings. [snip] Given Molly's age, parenting experience and general life experience, I put most of the blame for their antagonism with her. [snip] Molly is ready to indulge in a scene at the drop of a rubber wand, all the way through canon. > Pippin: > And Sirius isn't? Laura again: Nope. Sirius is calm, thoughtful and cautious througout GoF. Molly, on the other hand... Debbie: There may have been some jealousy at work, but the fact is that Sirius is a reckless person and always has been, even in GoF. Trading his tropical hideaway for a Hogsmeade cave, stealing food and breaking into other peoples' houses to use their fireplaces, are all reckless acts, even if we see them as heroic support for Harry. OoP simply confirms that Sirius has always lived life on the edge, and his rashness does not always serve a noble purpose. For me, it made Sirius a more consistent character, and it makes Molly's outbursts seem less irrational. Sirius does push Harry in directions no parent would want their child to tread. It's not unreasonable for Molly to be concerned that Sirius might be recklessly endangering Harry and her children. It's also entirely natural for Molly to have trouble letting go, even if it's not the best thing for her children, especially in these circumstances. It would be even more difficult if she had already experienced a death in VWI (something I think is quite likely). Thus, while it's clearly a fault of Molly's that she is unable to let go of her children - including Harry here for a moment - she doesn't lose my sympathy from this behavior. Sirius, on the other hand, while a model of good behaviour in GoF, has been known to indulge in recklessness for recklessness' sake. No wonder they're at loggerheads in OoP. On a point related to Molly's alleged jealousy, subsequent posters on this thread have pointed out that after a couple of hours in the Shrieking Shack, Sirius and Harry were ready to move in together. I had trouble accepting this at first, but have come to see it, after seeing Sirius' behaviour in OoP, as two grieving souls with an instant bond through James. Each saw in the other a way to help deal with their own grief. This doesn't mean that they didn't care for one another in their own right, but that the usual discomfort one might have in being thrown together with someone you don't know well didn't exist, because each thought the other would fill a gaping hole in his heart. What happened in OOP is that Harry and Sirius are coming to grips with reality, which is always more gritty than expectations. Sirius found not only that Harry is not a clone of James but also that mentoring Harry involves a lot more than being a companion. Harry at the same time is slowly adjusting his own perceptions of James and Sirius. It's frustrating parenting a teen, and it's equally frustrating to be one. Laura: One of the fun things about these discussions is that they're a bit of a Rorschach (sp?), aren't they? The ways that we see characters and events has as much to do with our own perspectives as with what JKR actually wrote. I guess what I'm revealing about myself is that I'm very uncomfortable with parents who smother their kids-which might mean that that's my natural impulse! Debbie: I've criticized Molly's parenting on a number of fronts in the past. Molly's a lot like my own mother in that respect. Overprotectiveness is not a good thing, but it does show the depth of her caring for her children and Harry. So while I don't excuse it, I know where it's coming from. Debbie who would infinitely prefer Molly's smothering to the Dursleys' neglect [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From notjustone at yahoo.com Mon Nov 3 04:14:24 2003 From: notjustone at yahoo.com (John and Peg) Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2003 20:14:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sirius as Surrogate Parent (was Re: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031103041424.70024.qmail@web14405.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84011 Kneasy: > Oh, dear. > Can we inject a bit of realism in here please? > Just what sort of surrogate parent would Sirius be? Pippin: > We have Dumbledore's assessment: "you were coming to > regard Sirius as a mixture of father and brother." > In real life, that's a recipe for disaster. There are all sorts > of workable parenting styles, from strict to permissive, but no > parent can succeed if there is any confusion about just who is > the parent and who is the child. > Harry keeps having to parent Sirius, > But Sirius had trouble letting go of his own child self, and he > could never have been a successful parent as long as he wanted to > treat Harry as a pal. Ok, just an idea here... but this is a book and not real life... therefore J.K. could have made it work for Sirius and Harry. "notjustone" From IrishMastermind at hotmail.com Mon Nov 3 04:52:29 2003 From: IrishMastermind at hotmail.com (Anne Geldermann) Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 23:52:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Black dog Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84012 Richard Parker said: > Hi guys, not sure if this has been picked up yet, but Winston > Churchill once famously described his depression as 'the black > dog'. Sirius' animagus form is obviously a black dog. Thus, > Harry may slide into depression due to Sirius' death. The black dog is a common occurence in folklore, especially in England. The apparition, with many nicknames (including the Grim, Padfoot, but mostly (Black/Old) Shuck) is usually considered a bad sign, including the death omen it is considered in the books. My guess is that JK and Churchill both got the idea from these stories. It is probably a safe bet that Harry will continue to be depressed about the loss of Sirius, although I think he seemed rather depressed and angry through almost the whole of OOTP anyway. What (if anything) do you suppose will snap him out of this funk? He seemed a little better after talking to Luna. Will he get better emotionally, or will brooding over the prophecy all summer plunge him further into Angstland? Anne From astrid at netspace.net.au Mon Nov 3 04:57:45 2003 From: astrid at netspace.net.au (Astrid Wootton) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 15:57:45 +1100 Subject: Nagini Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84013 A week or so ago, PK says Or maybe there's something special about Nagini herself? I'm > thinking of the Black Riders' steeds in LOTR, able to endure their > undead riders though all other animals panic in their presence. Astrid says Could Nagini turn out to be the snake that Harry released at the zoo? Another of LV?s inner cabinet who owes Harry a debt? If not Nagini, what of the chance, instead, of the escaped zoo snake turning up at some stage under LV?s command, and -- like Androcles and the Lion ? refusing to harm Harry. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 3 07:43:29 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 07:43:29 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts is in Scotland (longish) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84014 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > bboy_mn: > > Well, the consensus seems to be Scotland; the questions is WHERE in > Scotland. Of course the answer is in FICTIONAL Scotland, however, we > are searching for places based on real world geography that are likely > or at least, potentially capable of hiding a place like Hogwarts. > > > > Geoff Bannister on the other hand has been there (and currently is > there) and has had the honor of treading upon those hollowed grounds. > We must, therefore, lend a great credibility to that. > Thank you, kind sir. Two points. I am not currently there; my last visit was to a very different part - the Shetland Isles a year or so ago. I live nowadays in the South-West of England, having been a London resident for many years (ex-pat Lancastrian). I think Kirstini has the honour of being the Scot and holding the residency qualifications. I can just visualise Hogwarts being in one of the remote Highland locations with the snow on the heights and the gales battering round Gryffindor Tower in the winter, as you yourself have suggested. Geoff From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Mon Nov 3 07:51:29 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 02:51:29 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter D... Message-ID: <190.21f8785c.2cd76301@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84015 Hello evil_sushi2003 at hotmail.com, In reference to your comment: E.S.: ? I would have to say that in GOF when Harry asks ? Sirius if he can stay with him, Sirius behaves a little ? shifty on this, and IMO it's probably because DD has ? told him of the protection. Sirius has never made any ? 'halfbaked scheme' to try and spring Harry from the ? Dursleys. He asked Harry to stay with him when he ? believed that Pettigrew would be caught, when he ? knew nothing of the protection, when he thought he ? would be free. From the point that Sirius thinks that he ? can be cleared, all he wants to do is protect James' ? son, and treat him as if he were his own. This is what I think as well. DD had the opportunity to make a decision when Sirius was not exactly available for comment. DD did as he thought best in harbouring Harry in the ancient magic of his mother's blood. We do not know exactly where Sirius was leading up to DD's decision which makes it most plausible that DD acted without consultation to Sirius. Furthermore, the ancient magic that protects Harry would not have been available under Sirius's care.... Thus DD made the correct decision. Yes, Sirius LOVED Harry. But, even he would understand that the protection granted to him under his aunt's roof was greater than anything he could have ever given. -Tonks From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 3 08:21:46 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 08:21:46 -0000 Subject: Snape & Harry's Memory Perspective Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84016 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" wrote: > > Marianne: > > ... When breaking into another's mind, does the one breaking in > > see the memories with the same perspective that the memories' > > owner sees? Or does the Legilimens see the memory as if it were > > like thoughts trapped in a Pensieve, where the perspective is > > that of an outside observer? > > ...edited... > > > Sherrie repliied: > > > > What we saw was not Snape's view of Harry's memories - it was > > HARRY's view of those memories. We never went inside Snape's head > > to see what HE saw. > > > > I rather thought that the person whose memories were accessed > > would experience his or her own perspective of the memory, while > > the person watching would do just that - observe. > > Now me (Marianne): > > But Snape did see "flashes" of this. He says so himself and then > asks Harry to whom the dog belonged. So Snape obviously "saw" > something. > > Marianne bboy_mn: Tricky business this memory stuff. It appears that when someone is IN a Pensieve memory, they are an independant observer in a vitual world with some limits. The Legilimens spell causes a cascade of memories to occur for the person ONTO whom the spell was cast. The CASTER of the spell equally has some visual insight or mind sight of those same memories. As to whether the Legilimens memories are from the point of view of a neutral observer or from the point of view of the person those incidences happened to, depends on whether they are actual original memories or whether they are memories of memories. Very often the things we think are original memories, are not. They are memories of the last time we remembered the incident. In other words, not a memory of an event, but a memory of a memory. Restate, these are not memories of the event, but memories of the last time we thought about the event. That's also one reason why, when you go back to your childhood home and neighborhood, things don't look the way you remembered them. This also explains how and why all knowledge of an event doesn't vanish from your mind when you put a memory in a Pensieve. The original memory is stored and gone from your mind, but there are secondary memories to remind you that it existed, and what the general nature of the memory was. If this were not true, how could you ever recall a memory from the Pensieve? Based on my memory of what I read, some of the Harry's memories are described as from his point of view. For example, he is looking at Dudley who has a shiny new red bike. That sounded like we see it through Harry's eyes. However, when Harry uses the Shield Charm to bounce the Legilimens Charm back on to Snape and we start to see Snape's cascade of memories, we see both Snape as a crying little boy, and Snape's parents. We must acknowledge at this point that what was described is colored by Harry's interpretation of what he saw. Logically, this 'little boy/parents' memory could have been Snape's memory of his best friend and that boy's parents. But the book leads us to believe it was Snape. So we have seen Legilimens induced memories from both perspectives. However, let us remember that Harry's memories are 5 to 10 years old; Snape's memories are 20 to 30 years old. Therefore Snape's memories are more likely to be memories of memories and not originals. That could explain the difference we see between when Harry's memories are revealed and when Snape's are revealed. OR... since this is all pure speculation, it's possible that you see your own memories in the First Person, but you see other's memories as a neutral observer. That makes logical sense, but I think I prefer the way I described above, where the nature and freshness of the memory determines the perspective. You've brought up an interesting point. When I read the story, I never thought about the perspective of the memories, but now that you've mentioned it, I can't decide whether it's just a quirk of JKR's writing, or whether we have stumbled on something significant; something that could re-enter the story later. As long as we are on the subject, I agree with Snape, that Legilimens is not mind reading. The gift of Legilimens, as opposed to the Spell, alows the one who is gifted to sense emotions and see this cascade of mental images based on memories, but he must use his own judgement and interpretation skills to figure out what it all means. One aspect of it could be a degree of empathic ability; the ability to sense and feel the emotions of others. I think that would be the best indicator as to whether someone is telling the truth. It would take deeper feelings and mental images to determine the exact nature of the lie, and even more indepth 'vision' to accurately determine the truth. At best, anything other than a general sense of guilt and fear to determine lies, would be difficult to decipher and interpret. Harry and Voldemort do have a special connection, but I don't think that means that Voldemort automatically knows everything that Harry knows, any more than Harry knows everything about Voldemort. It's much more fragmented than that, in my opinion. Anyway, that's my best guess as to what is going on. bboy_mn From koukla_es at yahoo.es Mon Nov 3 09:31:37 2003 From: koukla_es at yahoo.es (neith_seshat) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 09:31:37 -0000 Subject: Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84017 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" > wrote: > > > > I would guess that Dumbledore and Sirius were both let in on > > the secret by Peter (though Dumbledore thought it was Sirius), > > but couldn't themselves reveal it to anyone else. > > > > Pippin > > > Hmm, this one I don't understand. > How could Dumbledore think it was Sirius if it was actually Peter who > let him in on the secret? > > Inge Neith: I'm sorry I don't have the books handy, but is it possible that the protected person can reveal their location at will, and not only the Secret-Keeper? If James told him, Dumbledore didn?t have to know abput the change. Just an idea Neith From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Mon Nov 3 13:42:41 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 13:42:41 -0000 Subject: Harry's behavior was Re: Riddle's information re: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84018 > Laura: > >>I still think that the prophecy is a great big old red > herring. I haven't yet read a compelling explanation for why LV > hadto be kept from knowing what it said. << Pippin: > > 1) Because Dumbledore was using it as bait to lure LV out of > hiding, but that could only work as long as there was *no* other > way LV could find out what it said, including the link in Harry's > mind. > > 2) Because Dumbledore didn't want LV to know that if "the one" > is not destroyed by LV, then LV himself will not survive. It would > appear that LV suspects this. But he can't know. Why erase all > doubt? > > 3) Because Dumbledore didn't want LV to know that according to > the Prophecy, Dumbledore will not be able to kill LV. > Dumbledore has reason to think that LV will fear him far less if LV finds out for sure that Dumbledore can't kill him. We can see > Dumbledore trying to sow the idea in LV's mind that there are > worse things than death, but so far LV isn't buying. > Laura responds: Okay, that all makes sense. Thanks to you and Caius Marcius for that explanation. To what extent do you think that the adults in the Order know all this? Obviously they all know that a prophecy exists and that it has something to do with the ultimate fates of LV and Harry (or maybe Neville?). But do they know that only the person described in the prophecy has the power to "vanquish" LV? > > Laura: > >>The idea that an adult keeps you in ignorance in order to > protect you is not one that kids understand. If the kid is old enough to ask the question, s/he's old enough to hear (at least some of) the answer.<< >Pippin: > Harry was neither child nor adult in OOP. He had the capabilities > of adulthood, but he still had a child's conception of what it > means to be grown up. > > He thought that having proved himself against Voldemort meant > he should be let in on everything. In truth, none of the grownups in the Order had been told all of Dumbledore's plans. > > All of the adults accepted that as members of a secret > organization, they were going to be operating with less than full > knowledge. Harry was told this also. But he couldn't grasp it. > Even after he was told the reason for secrecy, he assumed the > reason he wasn't being told everything was that Dumbledore > didn't trust him on account of his youth. That wasn't the case. > > Of course it felt awful being kept in the dark. But either Harry is a kid, and has to accept that right or wrong, adults are going to be making decisions for him, or he's an adult, and shouldn't expect anybody to have nurturing him as their first concern. But Harry wanted it both ways. Laura responds: Yes, teenagers are somewhere between child and adult. If you want them to grow in the right direction, you give them more responsibility and trust over time. That doesn't seem to be happening much in OoP. It's one thing to be told that you can't know all about what other people are doing (i.e., what are the grownups doing for the Order at night?). It's another to be told that you have to do certain things that might affect your mind and spirit and not be told why. No one in the Order is asked to do what Harry is asked to do. Of course, we know why that is, but if an adult were told to open his mind to his greatest enemy, that adult would want to know why. The adults in the Order know that only DD has all the information. But they still have more than Harry does. And when he asks for more, he's shut down by Molly. So naturally he doesn't get a sense of being in the same situation as the adults for the same reasons. He infers, correctly, that Molly thinks he's too young to have the information. I wonder if Remus finally gives in to Molly because she's about to go nuclear rather than because he really thinks she's right. Teenagers often have decisions made for them by adults in the RW. But at Hogwarts the kids are pretty much on their own. They don't rely on their parents for advice, they don't have formal mentors with whom they meet regularly. Harry, of all people, has every right to be furious that after everything he's been through in the past four years (pretty much without adult assistance except for Remus), all of a sudden adults are going all overprotective on him- except DD, who won't even look at him. Of course Harry is going to try to figure out what's happening. I don't think this is wanting it both ways. Nor do I think it has anything with not feeling nurtured. He feels, and with good reason, that people he wants to trust are lying by omission. He needs a little less "nurturing" and a little more honesty. This is not an everyday situation, in which adults keep their personal problems to themselves out of appropriate concern for their kids' feelings. This is a crisis, in which people's lives are at genuine risk, and to keep the person most at risk ignorant isn't protective, it's dangerous. This isn't mom and dad talking about splitting up or something like that-this is LV trying to invade Harry's mind, manipulate him and finally kill him. Keeping this from Harry doesn't make it any less likely that LV will succeed, imo. From rredordead at aol.com Mon Nov 3 15:49:01 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 15:49:01 -0000 Subject: Sirius & Molly (WAS: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: <001001c3a1b3$0d6d7140$9ddc5644@arlngt01.va.comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84019 Debbie Wrote: > I've criticized Molly's parenting on a number of fronts in the past. Molly's a lot like my own mother in that respect. Overprotectiveness is not a good thing, but it does show the depth of her caring for her children and Harry. So while I don't excuse it, I know where it's coming from. who would infinitely prefer Molly's smothering to the Dursleys' neglect Now me: Absolutely. No matter how I might disagree with some of Molly's decisions and 'smothering' at times you can't deny she has raised 7 good, kind, generous, strong willed and intelligent children. (I'm including Percy even though I disagree with his decisions.) Molly knows exactly what she has achieved and has every reason to be a proud Mother who has every right to pass judgment on a man who has spent all his adult life in prison. >From our point of view Molly could do with being more accepting of Sirius, because we know more of him than she does, we know just how innocent he really is, how he cares for Harry and how he has suffered for the last 15 years. But from Molly's point of view, even though she knows he is innocent, he is a man who has spent those 15 years in the company of hardened criminals, evil wizards and Dementors. She knows very well that has got to affect a person deeply psychologically. In Molly's opinion, and I agree with her, that Sirius, as a parent, is an unacceptable risk right now as Harry is such a precious commodity to be protected at all costs. In peacefully times I'm sure things would be different. Sirius had yet to prove himself to Molly. She sets a very high standard and when you look at the strength of the man she is married to-Arthur, the man she looks up to as a leader-Dumbledore and her own personal strength, I again don't blame her for being so judgmental. And as for Sirius, he strikes me a the sort of man who wouldn't go out of his way to prove himself to anyone, so you can see a stalemate would have resulted for probably many years or until a extreme situation forced them to accept each other. Unfortunately that will never happen, as Sirius is dead. Mandy. From rredordead at aol.com Mon Nov 3 15:59:12 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 15:59:12 -0000 Subject: Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84020 > Neith wrote: > I'm sorry I don't have the books handy, but is it possible that the > protected person can reveal their location at will, and not only the Secret-Keeper? If James told him, Dumbledore didn?t have to know > aboutt the change. Now me: An interesting idea. I was under the impression it was just the Secret Keeper who could revel the location and no one else. However if that's true, you could end up with a good weapon of imprisonment. Lock someone up in a house, put the Fidelius Charm on it and throw away the key. As long as the prisoner can't get out, they'd be stuck in there forever. A rather good kidnapping tool don't you think? Mandy From liwy_500 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 3 15:45:23 2003 From: liwy_500 at yahoo.com (LIWY) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 15:45:23 -0000 Subject: Nagini In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84021 >Astrid said: >Could Nagini turn out to be the snake that Harry released at the zoo? Another of LV?s inner cabinet who owes Harry a debt? I've come across this suggestion before, but I believe the biggest argument against that idea is that there is no hint that Harry recognizes her. -LIWY From grannybat at hotmail.com Mon Nov 3 16:46:13 2003 From: grannybat at hotmail.com (grannybat84112) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 16:46:13 -0000 Subject: Tommy Riddle's birth (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84022 Geoff Bannister and Pippin_999 caught my attention: > Geoff again: > > I don't know whether you're in the UK, but certainly in the > > case of adoptions and possibly orphanage situations... > > the details of parents are withheld. ...My point is that > > often, children from an orphanage might be adopted or fostered > > and thus this information would be kept under wraps. > > I was able to look this up thanks to > some of the more prominent UK orphanages who've put their > history on the web. At the time of Riddle's birth, an infant > would have been fostered for the first five or six years of life > then brought to the orphanage. The child's name was changed, > but efforts would have been made by the orphanage to locate the > father of the child so as to collect child support. Riddle might > not have known his real name until the Hogwarts letter came. Oh, this opens up all sorts of possibilities! Perhaps Baby Tom was thrust into a homelife as Dursley-ish as Harry's; or perhaps he felt loved and secure with his foster parents, then being removed from that environment is what began his hatred of life and people in general. (How likely is it that the foster parents would have allowed him to be taken back by the orphanage, though, if they had grown fond of him? Wouldn't they have adopted him?) The arrival of his Hogwarts letter started the process that focused the boy's seething but generic resentment into a clearly defined hatred fueled by the information he discovered about his true origins. I'm wondering if it wasn't during this period, the crucial formative years with his foster family, that Tom Riddle developed his fear and hatred of death. That piece of information Voldemort reveals during the duel with Dumbledore in the Ministry atrium is crucial to the entire story: There is nothing worse than death... Tom Riddle didn't pursue immortality just to prove the extent of his wizarding power to himself and the world at large. He didn't alter his body beyond human limits just because he knows that pervasive uneasiness about dying that most human beings feel. He doesn't kill after he tortures because it's simply a neat, easy way to dispose of people who obstruct his goals. No, he kills rather than leaves his victims broken in body and soul because he believes death is the worst experience he can visit upon them. Tom Riddle turned into Voldemort because he ***fears*** death. Some traumatic event had to bring about this phobia. Something overwhelming. An event so frightening that the memory of it still drives him decades after it happened. Something that left him feeling so powerless that he's dedicated his existence to ensuring that he never feels so helpless ever again. Something like witnessing the slow, lingering death of someone Tom Riddle loved in his childhood.... Then the Sergeant Majorette said: > >I was surfing through the "QuickQuotes" section of The Leaky >Cauldron, and found one article which states that JKR's grandmother >(doesn't say which one) was illegitimate and "abandoned" in a London >orphanage where she was adopted by the proprietors. The quotation >marks on the word 'abandoned' are mine: the article goes on to state >that she was regularly visited by solicitors until she was 14. Excelsior!! Theorists assemble! Can you remember the approximate date of that article? I'd like to devour it myself. Grannybat From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 3 16:47:34 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 16:47:34 +0000 Subject: I know Molly..... Message-ID: <6C4FE598-0E1D-11D8-8A81-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84023 Molly seems to have been on the receiving end of some hard words recently, all of them from female posters. I wonder why? I'm probably going to get a lot of flak for this one, but note that I do not make judgements, only observations. The WW is highly traditional, including the portrayals of women. There seems to be a strict divide; what might be called career types with no apparent families (MacGonagall, Skeeter) and the home based (Molly, Petunia) with no career. No compromise or blending of the two so far as I can see. I feel that I understand Molly perfectly. She is the archetype of the traditional English mum, a species that is rapidly disappearing as more and more wives return to work as soon as practicable after producing a family. Those that can recall the times before 'housewife' was an accusation enunciated with a curled lip will remember that this group were the bedrock, the mortar between the bricks of social and family structures. They still are in more traditional areas of the country. Certain traits are essential to claim membership - family comes first, always; children never really become adults, even if they are 35 and settled down, they are still their children and likely to be the recipients of advice or censure, wanted or not, appropriate or not. Approval or acceptance of outsiders is conditional and will be withdrawn abruptly if unacceptable behaviour is detected or even suspected.Daughters are generally treated with a light touch but sons, that's different. Sons are naturally gullible and totally incapable of looking after themselves. When young they will be led astray by manipulative friends, when older they become targets for some designing tart. No woman is really good enough to deserve their son, but usually they manage to bite their lip and somehow refrain from pointing out the glaringly obvious faults this child-snatcher exhibits. Best to try and make the most of it and try and train her into some sort of suitability by telling her how he likes his toast, how he must have woolen socks and "I don't want to interfere dear, but...." They cry at their son's wedding but not at their daughter's. They can drive you mad, if you let them, especially the young wives who have to tolerate this interference. However, I'm old enough to have seen many of these young wives gradually transform into carbon copies as their own sons grow up. Of course, in these days of personal growth and self-actualisation they are generally scorned. But for generation after generation they ruled supreme. They knew that 'family' concerned the group and took priority; any back-sliding into 'self' was potentially dangerously anti-family and was viewed with extreme suspicion. Recognise any of Molly in there? Thought so. In these terms Harry is an honorary son and as such should be protected from being led astray (Ron and the flying Ford Anglia), from designing females (possibly Hermione) and from unsuitable influences (Sirius). Molly is not intellectual. Caring and worrying is much more fundamental than mere intellect. Gut instinct rules. Things are in simple black and white, good and bad. Anything, real or imagined, that poses a risk to her offspring (including Harry) is bad and must merit objections even if a coherent argument cannot be formed. Could you ever see her reaching an accommodation with Sirius over Harry? I can't. Kneasy From mbush at lainc.com Mon Nov 3 17:35:35 2003 From: mbush at lainc.com (mtwelovett) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 17:35:35 -0000 Subject: Nagini In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84025 > >Astrid said: > >Could Nagini turn out to be the snake that Harry released at the > zoo? Another of LV1s inner cabinet who owes Harry a debt? "LIWY" wrote: > I've come across this suggestion before, but I believe the biggest > argument against that idea is that there is no hint that Harry > recognizes her. What an interesting thought.. yet another of Voldie's servants in the debt of Mister Potter. I think that under the circumstances, if this is the case, Harry wouldn't have necessairly recognized the snake. It had been 4 years, and it is likely Nagini is much bigger in GOF than when she (?) was at the zoo, and there were other dire things happening (Cedric's death, et cetera). There isn't any indication of Harry recognizing the kind of snake either there or in OOP, and as someone who doens't pay a lot of attention to snakes, I doubt even if he had recognized it as the same sort of snake, to remember the exact markings to identify it as the exact same snake is pretty unlikey. So this could perhaps be a viable thought. Voldermort could have found Nagini in London when he was with Quirrell in London in PS/SS when Hagrid and Harry meet him on Harry's first trip to Diagon Alley. Mtwelovett From grannybat at hotmail.com Mon Nov 3 17:59:19 2003 From: grannybat at hotmail.com (grannybat84112) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 17:59:19 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84026 Geoff Bannister pondered: > Tom tells us that his father > abandoned her when he discovered the WW connection, which > implies at that time she was already pregnant. ...As Grannybat > has suggested, was she physically unable to go back? ...Perhaps the > mother had a bad pregnancy and was ill? ... > Perhaps, his father injured her physically. That was the first thought to cross my mind: He beat her black and blue when she was nearing the end of her term and then kicked her literally into the streets. But I just can't picture any functioning witch with a sliver of backbone-?particularly not a woman of a proud Slytherin family directly descended from Salazar himself?-suffering that kind of abuse without fighting back. She'd have zapped her husband into a toad at the very least. Nothing the narrator or the characters say in the opening chapter of GoF leads me to believe that Riddle's father had suffered years earlier from a confrontation with his cast-off wife. Perhaps he had destroyed her wand? If she was physically weakened by a bad pregnancy, was she so ill that she was unable to use St. Mungo's medical resources? Or even visit an apothecary in Diagon Alley? Couldn't she have sent an owl, or even a Muggle servant, to request a house call? And what role did Tom Riddle's paternal grandparents play in this episode? Surely they wouldn't allow the beating/abandonment of the woman who was carrying their (presumed only) grandchild, especially if she were ill... unless the secret of the mother's Magical powers was exposed to them, too, in a very spectacular, undeniable way. The more I think about this situation, the uglier the implications are. Grannybat From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Mon Nov 3 18:04:07 2003 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 18:04:07 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Nagini Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84027 I am almost sure that the snake Harry released from the zoo was a boa constrictor from Brazil, and Nagini is a poisonous snake (possibly a cobra, but definitely producing venom) and her name suggests that she comes from India. Janet Anderson (at work without books) _________________________________________________________________ Fretting that your Hotmail account may expire because you forgot to sign in enough? Get Hotmail Extra Storage today! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es From mbush at lainc.com Mon Nov 3 18:08:37 2003 From: mbush at lainc.com (mtwelovett) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 18:08:37 -0000 Subject: Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84028 > > Neith: > > I'm sorry I don't have the books handy, but is it possible that the > protected person can reveal their location at will, and not only the > Secret-Keeper? If James told him, Dumbledore didn?t have to know > abput the change. > > Just an idea Maybe Dumbledore found the place in Goderic's Hollow in the beginning that = was going to be used for the Potters, so he knew where it was going to be before the charm was put on. I'm curious though as to who perforned the charm? (but that would negate a former home being used as a safe place since anyone who knew you were there before could prusumably find you again. ... or did Dumbledore know about it, but couldn't "find" them once t= he charm had been performed, and since he no longer needed it, James gave DD his invisibility cloak before the charm was performed? ) The other thing with this is, if Grimmuld place exists, and the Black famil= y knows where it is, even with the "invisible" characteristics it has thanks = to Sirius' Dad, would Malfoy/Narcissa for instance still be able to find it af= ter the Order started using it as headquarters? And what would they find? An empty = house? I remember that they were saying (in SS I think it was, but maybe PO= A when we learn a lot more about this) that voldermort or whomever would be able to peer through the windows (in this case of the Potter's) and still n= ot find them without the knowledge from the secret keeper. So would the Malfoys be = able to enter Grimmauld Place and find it empty? I would have thought the Kreacher would have been a giveaway of some sort to the Malfoys that soemthing was going on in the house, even without what he "could" have maybe gotten away with telling them. Just some thoughts Mtwelovett From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Nov 3 18:12:44 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 13:12:44 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) Message-ID: <1dd.139a6d2f.2cd7f49c@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84029 In a message dated 11/3/2003 1:04:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, grannybat at hotmail.com writes: I just can't picture any functioning witch with a sliver of backbone-?particularly not a woman of a proud Slytherin family directly descended from Salazar himself?-suffering that kind of abuse without fighting back. She'd have zapped her husband into a toad at the very least. Nothing the narrator or the characters say in the opening chapter of GoF leads me to believe that Riddle's father had suffered years earlier from a confrontation with his cast-off wife. Sherrie here: I've always assumed (yes, I know...) that her good Slytherin family disowned her, upon discovering her liaison with a ::gasp!::: Muggle. THEY may have broken her wand - "If you want to lower yourself to live with a Muggle, you'll live AS a Muggle!" Incidentally, do we even have evidence in canon that Riddle's mum & dad were married? Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mbush at lainc.com Mon Nov 3 18:15:09 2003 From: mbush at lainc.com (mtwelovett) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 18:15:09 -0000 Subject: Nagini In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84030 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Janet Anderson" < norek_archives2 at h...> wrote: > I am almost sure that the snake Harry released from the zoo was a boa > constrictor from Brazil, and Nagini is a poisonous snake (possibly a cobra, > but definitely producing venom) and her name suggests that she comes from > India. Very good point, I had forgotten the reference in either GoF or OOP about milking Nagini, and you are also correct about the Boa Constrictor. So I guess that negates the two snakes being the same. I had envisioned Nagini being more of a constrictor size, than what I think of for something like a cobra, but I know very little about snakes, so don't know how big a Cobra could get really. Mtwelovett From tammy at mauswerks.net Mon Nov 3 18:14:56 2003 From: tammy at mauswerks.net (Tammy Rizzo) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 13:14:56 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Nagini In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FA654D0.11567.2D9ADAA@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 84031 > > >Astrid said: > > >Could Nagini turn out to be the snake that Harry released at the > > zoo? Another of LV1s inner cabinet who owes Harry a debt? > > "LIWY" wrote: > > I've come across this suggestion before, but I believe the biggest > > argument against that idea is that there is no hint that Harry > > recognizes her. Now me, Tammy: Actually, I believe the strongest argument against this particular theory is the fact that the snake in the zoo was a Brazilian boa constrictor (PS/SS, pg 28, US Scholastic boxed set), which is completely non-venomous, while Nagini must be 'milked' for LV's sustenance (GOF, pg 7, same box set). Only venomous snakes can be milked -- you have to coax them to release their venom into a bottle (as opposed to into your arm). Therefore, Harrys' pal from the zoo simply cannot be Nagini. *** Tammy tammy at mauswerks.net From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Mon Nov 3 17:39:30 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 11:39:30 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Nagini References: Message-ID: <000901c3a231$75fcb9e0$3192aec7@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84032 >>Astrid said: >>Could Nagini turn out to be the snake that Harry released at the >>zoo? Another of LVs inner cabinet who owes Harry a debt? >-LIWY: >I've come across this suggestion before, but I believe the biggest >argument against that idea is that there is no hint that Harry >recognizes her. Iggy here: There's also the fact that the snake in the zoo is specifically identified by a sign stating "Boa Constrictor, Brazil" (ch 2, pg 28, US ed. paperback.) As we know, constrictors aren't venomous in the slightest. On the other hand, The Cold Blooded News (The Newsletter of the Colorado Herpetological Society) at www.coloherp.org/cb-news/Vol-29/cbn-0203/KingCobra.php lists the following information about the King Cobra (Ophiophagus hannah) The king cobra is an Elapid, but it is placed in a separate genus, Ophiophagus, from the true cobra, Naja, and is the only species in the Ophiophagus genus. The king cobra is considered to be the longest venomous snake, with a maximum length of 18 feet (5.4m). However, due to its threatened status, it is very rare to find king cobras approaching this length. Most of these snakes in captivity are an average of 13 feet (3.9m). By this description, the snake Nagini, could easily be a King Cobra, in accordance with the following excerpt: "Something was slithering toward him along the dark corridor floor, and as it drew nearer to the sliver of firelight, he realized with a thrill of terror that it was a gigantic snake, at least twelve feet long." (GoF, ch1, pg 13, US paperback ed.) Adding in the following information: naga-king: Nagas are snake-spirits. They have the power to change their shape, their females (nagini) often assuming the guise of beautiful women. Although they inhabit the subterranean land of "Patala", they are connected with the water element and have the power to bring rain. Thus indicating that Nagini is the name of a female Naga, and as the name originates from an area known to revere cobras, King Cobras in particular, it can be logically deduced that Nagini is most likely a female King Cobra. Iggy McSnurd From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net Mon Nov 3 18:40:48 2003 From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Robert Jones) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 18:40:48 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Penseive Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84033 In OOTP Snape put three memories in the Pensieve, and I was thinking what the other two might be -- might he be trying to hide whether he was a double agent spying for LV? something more about Lily? -- and whether Harry would be able to learn more from the past. But then I thought that since Snape wouldn't be giving Harry any more Occulmency lessons Snape wouldn't bother putting any memories he didn't want Harry to see in there. But then I thought that if Snape is in fact spying for the Order, he might put memories he does not want LV to know in there before a spying mission. So the Penseive may come up in Book6 or 7. Harry may stumble onto more knowledge of the past if he ends up in Snape's office when Snape is on a mission. Bobby Jones From manawydan at ntlworld.com Mon Nov 3 19:10:42 2003 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 19:10:42 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wizard government (was wizards and the queen) References: <1067809165.13997.91489.m13@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001001c3a23e$2fc1adc0$19e76151@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 84034 Astrofiammante wrote: >When we first hear about the structure of the Ministry of Magic, it >seems fair to assume it is constituted along the same lines as our >own government. There's a minister in charge, who seems quite an >innocuous chap, and a lot of civil servants who work for him. So far >so good. It's all a bit bureaucratic, but that doesn't seem anything >out of the ordinary. He must have a certain amount of respectability >if the Muggle Prime Minister will deal with him. The early books seem to stress the similarities with our own world, where we too notice arbitrary and incomprehensible bits of bureaucracy. But gradually we are led into an understanding that the WW bureaucracy is entirely self-regulating and, increasingly, self-aggrandising. >learn that justice in the wizarding world is not the impartial matter >that we expect in our own society, despite having the external >trappings of such justice - a courtroom with a presiding officer, a >jury in the case of the Pensieve trials. Though the "tribunal"-like style of judicial proceeding is exactly the sort of thing you'd expect to see in a bureaucracy. >Well, the mediaeval model of government was monarchy. Did the >wizarding world ever have a monarchy of its own? And if not, how was >it governed? Was there ever any kind of revolution? Or did the >wizarding population simply come under the auspices of Muggle My own theory is that wizardry just "opted out" of the muggle world by degrees, as their own techniques of magic evolved and it became both more feasible to live seperately and more difficult to live together. But there would have been a variety of different models for them to try: monarchical, imperial, conciliar, oligarchic, magisterial, democratic, and so on. In the end, they have settled on a bureaucratic (though apparently meritocratic rather than oligarchic) model. We know that the Ministry was preceded by a Council, but nothing about what powers that Council had or how it enforced its authority. (my own, highly fictional and speculative theory is that the WW used to be one in which there were a number of currents of thought but that the Council used questionable means to enforce its authority as the single source of governance and all records of that time were destroyed or hidden. Thus the transition to the Ministry was just a reorganisation of something that already existed rather than a new development. As I said, highly speculative and not at all supported by canon) >3) The wizarding world saw no reason to bugger about with >representation and was perfectly content with the concept of an >oligarchic government run by an appointee like Fudge. Things were >going along just fine until that nasty Voldemort came along and >forced him to behave unreasonably. Bureaucracies can of course work very well in times of stability. Tensions only arise if either the bureaucracy itself is undergoing changes or it's not responding to an external crisis (as we have seen with the MoM) Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 3 19:25:27 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 19:25:27 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84035 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > >Laura: > Still, as soon as Sirius comes onto > the scene, Harry gives his greatest love and loyalty to him. He > shows an intensity of feeling toward Sirius that he never shows > toward Molly. > Harry, being Sirius's godson, was a lot closer to > being his son than he was to being Molly's. I don't know, Laura. Do you remember how Harry FELT when he was enveloped in Molly's hug after the graveyard awfulness in GoF? He NEEDED to feel loved and comforted, and he got that feeling when Molly held him. He may not say it outright, but how many 15-year-old boys would? I think you're right that there was something really special in Harry's feelings for Sirius. There was a real *excitement* in Harry about getting to know his godfather, about beginning a life with him. I'm sure much of that has to do w/ his parents'--esp. his father's--feelings about Sirius. But I don't think this means that Molly is somehow unimportant to Harry or someone he feels intrudes in his life. Not at all. She's got 7 children of her own and--as HARRY sees it--has no moral or legal obligation to add him to the brood. *We* sense that Molly feels this and *wants* this, but perhaps Harry doesn't recognize that and just doesn't want to be an added burden to her. Contrast that with how, at the end of PoA, Harry *knows* how excited Sirius is about getting to be with him; they're two guys essentially alone in the world, looking forward to a life together. That is a really special thing for Harry, but I think he cares a lot for Molly, too, and appreciates her "mothering". Siriusly Snapey Susan From lovelymelody at oreka.com Mon Nov 3 18:13:34 2003 From: lovelymelody at oreka.com (vesper_vane) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 18:13:34 -0000 Subject: Snape:Voldemort's faithful servant ? (again) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84036 I know it's been discussed a lot lately,but I'm bringing this up.Just a thought: at the beginning of GoF,in Harry's dream,Voldemort is talking to Wormtail about his "faithful servant in Hogwarts" (don't have the exact quote).But (correct me if I'm wrong),at THIS MOMENT ,Barty Jr is not at Hogwarts yet...He took Moody's place just before the beginning of the school year,right?So do you believe he was talking about Barty Jr in anticipation,or about someone else? And about the presence/absence of Snape in the graveyard...All the Deatheaters APPARATED in the graveyard.These events take place during the tournament,and all the teachers are at Hogwarts.What if Snape had been called by Voldy but COULDN't join them because YOU CANNOT APPARATE in Hogwarts (this is repeated in almost in every book,must be important,no?) Tell me what you about that.Personnally I hope Snape is on the good side,he's just so powerful as a character! Vesper From o_caipora at yahoo.com Mon Nov 3 19:25:37 2003 From: o_caipora at yahoo.com (o_caipora) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 19:25:37 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84037 Two thoughts on Ma Riddle. Changing mores and medical advances must be taken into account. Decades ago, an out-of-wedlock pregnanacy was a shameful thing. Hurried weddings would be arranged, expectant mothers would leave town before they showed, and return after the child was safely deposited in an orphanage. The infant was the "corpus delito", the body of evidence of the shameful occurence. The secrecy of orphanages was motivated by the need to preserve the mothers from unending shame. A husband might not be thrilled, twenty years on, to discover on his doorstep six feet of hulking proof that his blushing bride had not in fact been a virgin. Orphanages would have a cult of secrecy because so many of their charges were born of unwed mothers. If the Riddles were unmarried, and Tom a bastard in the literal as well as the figurative sense, the failure of his grandparents on either side to take an interest in his welfare would be explained. Nowadays a healthy white infant is easily adopted in the US. That may well not have been the case in the UK of Riddle's infancy. The superiority of foster families to benevolent government care in a large institution is a recent notion, too. Illegitimacy would explain his abandonment by family. But even if not illegitimate, once in an orphanage of the early part of the 20th century, he'd be more likely to remain there than not. Grannybat has contended that one of the failures of the WW is that it is at least as morally backward as ethically backward. If the Hogwarts Express is a magical version of a steam engine rather than a diesel or electric locomotive, the WW's attitude towards unwed mothers may have been far behind the steam era, especially in Riddle's youth. Regarding Ma Riddle's death in childbirth, Miss Manners notes in today's Washington Post that when the rules of etiquette were set, death in childbirth was far more prevalent than today. With ultrasound, a high-risk birth can be identified far in advance, and precautions taken. That's new. Not until the last couple of decades have parents known beforehand to expect a boy or a girl, and twins were often a total surprise. If Ma Riddle were married, she might have defied her wizarding parents to marry a Muggle. I'm going to guess that excessive pride runs in Tom's blood. Had she defied her parents to run off with Tom's father, that pride might have kept her from turning to her parents, or the wizarding world for help. Muggles give birth all the time, she might have reasoned, and not turned to a hedge-witch midwife for help. Once she encountered problems, what them? Image her in a Muggle hospital, perhaps a charity ward of iron bedsteads and starched matrons. A breech birth, perhaps, or internal bleeding that would not stop. She realizes she has problems, and needs Wizarding medicine. So, she asks for her wand? Asks for her owl? What do you thing a hospital nurse would say? People always tend to treat the sick as if they were somehow mentally deficient. If she asked for a wand or an owl, she would be humored, and if she persisted, she would be restrained. In a hospital of many years ago, the interval between the onset of problems and death could be quite brief. So, I think the argument for illegitimacy explains Tom's abandonment to the orphanage. His remaining there is a product of the times and requires no further explanantion. His mother's death in childbirth can be explained by pride, and the medicine of the times. One detail I find odd, which is Tom's status as the "last descendent of Slytherin." Several years ago in the film "The Shadow" the bad guy was "the last descendent of Ghenghis Khan." Recent medical scholarship and DNA tests indicate that about five percent of the human race is descended from Ghenghis, which knocks that characterization for a loop. That Slytherin's progeny, after a thousand years for his blood to mingle widely, should be reduced to a single survivor, suggests some sort of congenital defect. - Caipora From grannybat at hotmail.com Mon Nov 3 19:29:44 2003 From: grannybat at hotmail.com (grannybat84112) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 19:29:44 -0000 Subject: Tommy Riddle's birth (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84038 Ginger noticed: > > we've overlooked one little detail: Mrs. Riddle probably didn't > plan to die. Tom the Muggle left her to go home to his parents. > She would still have the house or flat or whereever they were living. Not necessarily. If wealthy, spoiled Tom Senior was still living in the family mansion 16+ years after the marriage, then the new bride probably moved into the house with him. The grandparents might even have given them a wing of their own. > She may well have had the notion that the baby > would fix it all. Her husband would see his son and her parents > would see their grandson, and all would be well with the world. Hey, > sometimes it actually works, especially with disgruntled parents. But if the grandparents were disgruntled because of the pregnancy in the first place... Consider: Charming, handsome Tom Sr. seduces a village girl for his own amusement. Village girl confronts him with evidence of pregnancy, demands he do the decent thing. Charming Tommy gives the standard excuses and accusations?that kid can't be mine!?but in the end his parents pressure him to marry the girl. She's not the kind of daughter-in-law they would have preferred (in GoF the grandparents Riddle are described as wealthy, aloof, and very class-conscious), but they won't risk losing their what could be their first grandchild. (Charming Tommy is an only child; Diary!Riddle never mentions any other Riddle relatives, and no other Riddles claim the family mansion once parents & son are found dead.) So this is a grudging, loveless marriage from the start. If the expecting bride were living in the same house with her resentful in-laws, that would only have compounded problems, particularly if the pregnancy had complications. Then, late in her pregnancy, evidence of her Magical nature comes to light. Not just a suspicion, but incontrovertible proof. (Maybe the husband and in-laws walked in on her when she was attempting some magical method to heal herself.) Charming Tommy sees his chance and pounces; he's been waiting all these months for an excuse to rid himself of this unwanted wife and child. The grandparents are so shocked by the magic they've witnessed that they offer no resistance when their son renounces his pregnant wife and tosses her into the street. The Riddles hush up anyone who might breathe a word of the scandal, then resume living as if no marriage had ever happened. Riddle's mother, penniless, friendless, battered emotionally and physically (bereft of her wand?), creeps off to seek the shelter of charity. It's the only explanation I can see that explains why a Slytherin witch powerful enough to produce such magically strong offspring didn't blast her faithless husband and uncaring in-laws to cinders... or put them under the Imperius Curse in the first place. Grannybat From liwy_500 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 3 19:49:00 2003 From: liwy_500 at yahoo.com (LIWY) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 19:49:00 -0000 Subject: Snape:Voldemort's faithful servant ? (again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84039 Vesper wrote: > I know it's been discussed a lot lately, but I'm bringing this up. Just a thought: at the beginning of GoF, in Harry's dream, Voldemort is talking to Wormtail about his "faithful servant in Hogwarts" (don't have the exact quote). But (correct me if I'm wrong), at THIS MOMENT, Barty Jr is not at Hogwarts yet... He took Moody's place just before the beginning of the school year,right? So do you believe he was talking about Barty Jr in anticipation, or about someone else? I say: No, he doesn't say his "faithful servant" is at Hogwarts. It's Barty Jr. > And about the presence/absence of Snape in the graveyard...All the Deatheaters APPARATED in the graveyard. These events take place during the tournament,and all the teachers are at Hogwarts. What if Snape had been called by Voldy but COULDN'T join them because YOU CANNOT APPARATE in Hogwarts (this is repeated in almost in every book,must be important,no?) I think there may be a chance that Snape was at the graveyard. There's nothing against him leaving the Hogwarts grounds and apparating from there. In addition, it's possible for him to have used a portkey. If you're looking on from a distance, then there's no way to tell someone who comes in by apparation vs. someone who arrives via portkey. So the no-apparition rule doesn't really pose much of a barrier to his (possible) presence in the graveyard. From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Mon Nov 3 20:07:23 2003 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 20:07:23 -0000 Subject: Tube clues to whereabouts of Grimmauld Place (was London Locations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84040 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: (snip) Looking at the time taken on the Hogwarts Express day, > another area worthy of note would be around Mornington Crescent, > which I seem to recall is rush hours only nowadays. Looking at my map > of London, walking as a group would probably be slower and I think > Chalk Farm or Camden Town would be a bit far. The Mornington Crescent > area is also pretty seedy and run down. > > Geoff Carolyn: Although I still think my suggestion of the dilapidated streets to the north and east of Kings Cross towards Highbury are a good location for Grimmauld Place (with Caledonian Rd as the archetypal grotty tube station, 4-5 stops from the centre of town), if it was Mornington Crescent, this might be an amusing JKR in-joke. There is an extremely funny radio show called 'I'm sorry I haven't a clue' on BBC Radio 4, and one of the regular games they play is called 'Mornington Crescent'. The panellists are supposedly following a set of rules in order to work out the fastest way to Mornington Crescent across the London rail network. The joke, however, is that they make up the rules as they go along, and eventually arbitrarily announce they have reached the destination. It's a show which provokes all sorts of puzzled enquiries from confused listeners, and I feel might have a waspish sort of appeal to JKR, given our interminable picking over of her every word and nuance ! From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Mon Nov 3 20:11:14 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 15:11:14 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Black dog References: Message-ID: <000501c3a246$a2115080$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 84041 Anne wrote: It is probably a safe bet that Harry will continue to be depressed about the loss of Sirius, although I think he seemed rather depressed and angry through almost the whole of OOTP anyway. What (if anything) do you suppose will snap him out of this funk? He seemed a little better after talking to Luna. Will he get better emotionally, or will brooding over the prophecy all summer plunge him further into Angstland? Joj writes: I'm hoping it starts with Petunia. She, well all of the Dursley's will probably notice a change in Harry. Maybe she will ask him some questions, want to know what kind of danger Harry, and so all of her family, is in. Reguardless, I hope to see a Harry that is more focused and will work on his relationships with his friends and the Order members. I hope he will take his school work more seriously and pay attention better in every way. I think we'll see a wiser and more mature Harry. Hopefully, he'll still have some innocense and not be bitter. I'm not asking for to much, am I? Joj [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From alison.williams at virgin.net Mon Nov 3 20:33:07 2003 From: alison.williams at virgin.net (Alison Williams) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 20:33:07 -0000 Subject: Snape & Harry's Memory Perspective Question and then some In-Reply-To: <1067856622.3253.25916.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000901c3a249$b58aca30$54906751@yourq7fwqx3ncp> No: HPFGUIDX 84042 Tonks wrote - >Will Harry ever see eye to eye with Snape? Will they ever be able to >look at one another without hatred? > >Opinions? It has to be, doesn't it? Unity and the dangers of pride and of prejudice are such an underlying theme of the books. At least Dumbledore, Hermione and the Sorting Hat seem to think they are important, even if no-one else is listening! I can't believe that the houses can go on relating to each other as if life was a game of Quidditch. Surely they've all got to 'grow up' in the sense of showing some real maturity. This would involve admitting that no-one is perfect and no-one is irredeemable - unless they choose to be. Harry now knows some of the reasons for Snape being like he is, and he knows that much of what Snape said about his father was justified. Snape now knows that the Sorting Hat thought that he (Harry) would have done well in Slytherin house - i.e. that Harry has many of the qualities that Slytherin approved of. They've both seen something of what the other has had to suffer. Neither of them wanted to see these things. They both have a lot to get over, a lot of pride and pre-conceptions and prejudices to admit and get past, to allow even a grudging respect for each other. They're both going to reject and deny this as long and hard as they can. Perhaps Dumbledore was wiser than he seemed in giving Snape the job of teaching Harry occlumency? Alison From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 3 20:49:19 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 12:49:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) Message-ID: <20031103204919.74035.qmail@web40014.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84043 3Nov03 Ever since my second read of OotP and subsequent rereading of a few chapters, can't stop thinking about Luna Lovegood. Exactly who/what is she? When we first meet Luna on the train going to Hogwarts, she's described as having "waist-length, dirty blond hair (not sure if dirty refers to the condition of her hair or the color, I think it's probably the condition due to her spacy character), very pale eyebrows and protuberant eyes..." Of course we get a glimpse of her strange taste in accessories as well as her distant dotty character. Now the first thing I thought about after reviewing this description was Veela, at least part Veela-- pale coloring, aloof manner. Later we learn that Luna's father is editor of the "Quibbler", the alternate wizarding newspaper and believes, as does Luna, in all sorts of strange animals that not many others do. Why would the family believe in such? Could they have actually lived among such strange beings and are just trying to inform the rest of the wizarding world? Then, when it came to riding the Thestrals, she hopped on side saddle. Why would she need to ride side-saddle? But the quote that really raises a red flag: "Luna was already in place, sitting side-saddle, and adjusting her robes as though she did this every day." Doesn't she seem just a little too familiar with the art of Thestral riding? Even Ron and Neville of old wizarding families don't know what to make of Thestrals. I mean really, where's this girl from? OK, now on to the Department of Mysteries, in front of the veil. When Harry asks if anyone else hears the whispering, Luna is the only one who claims to hear something. She says, "there are people in there." , Hermione vehemently objecting to the term in there. Could this be a hint that Luna knows something about the nature of the Department of Mysteries that we've yet to discover? Then, after all the action fighting the Death Eaters, we aren't told which spell hit Luna, but are told that she "went flying throught the air,...hit a desk, slid over it's surface and onto the floor, and on the other side where she lay sprawled , as still as Hermione." Sounds pretty serious, but Hermione landed in the hospital wing as a patient, Luna didn't. This fact is casually revealed when we're informed that Luna dropped in to visit. (Bloomsbury Ed. page 746) IMHO, Luna is some order of being, or combination, not totally human. I see her decision to join forces with H/R/H, the only non-Gryffindor, as a foreshadowing to the subsequent revelation of an entire new "ethnic group" in the WW that we so far haven't met. Anybody pick up any hints in canon, or have ideas? ~Paula "Griff" Gaon Please vote in the "Which is your favorite creature?" poll at. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/polls Thanks to everyone who's already voted! --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Exclusive Video Premiere - Britney Spears [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Mon Nov 3 20:43:31 2003 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 09:43:31 +1300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape:Voldemort's faithful servant ? (again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20031104093205.00a98140@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 84044 At 18:13 3/11/2003 +0000, you wrote: Vesper wrote >I know it's been discussed a lot lately,but I'm bringing this up.Just >a thought: at the beginning of GoF,in Harry's dream,Voldemort is >talking to Wormtail about his "faithful servant in Hogwarts" (don't >have the exact quote).But (correct me if I'm wrong),at THIS >MOMENT ,Barty Jr is not at Hogwarts yet...He took Moody's place just >before the beginning of the school year,right?So do you believe he >was talking about Barty Jr in anticipation,or about someone else? > >And about the presence/absence of Snape in the graveyard...All the >Deatheaters APPARATED in the graveyard.These events take place during >the tournament,and all the teachers are at Hogwarts.What if Snape had >been called by Voldy but COULDN't join them because YOU CANNOT >APPARATE in Hogwarts (this is repeated in almost in every book,must >be important,no?) > >Tell me what you about that.Personnally I hope Snape is on the good >side,he's just so powerful as a character! Tanya here. I have been thinking about this in a different view. But here goes what things I can think of. I must got back and read, see what else I can pick up. But I am not sure that there is any cannon that indicates Snape failed somewhat in his spying the first time round when he joined Dumbledore years ago. What I mean, is that did LV ever suspect him. Then if he did, what methods did LV use against Snape to try and determine loyalty. Judging from LV's character, he wouldn't of hesitated to use an AK for far less. So, if Snape has fooled LV to this day in the series and LV knows where he works. That idea could have some merit. However on thing in GoF caught my attention. It might be nothing, but when finished the book and finding Moody was a fake. Back near the start, when Draco became a ferret. Moody (fake) says he is very interested in having a little chat to Snape. Now I wonder what was said. Would love to know if Moody (fake) told him anything about LV's plan. Tanya From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 3 20:35:08 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 20:35:08 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: <1dd.139a6d2f.2cd7f49c@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84045 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, MadameSSnape at a... wrote: Sherrie: > Incidentally, do we even have evidence in canon that Riddle's mum & dad were > married? > > Sherrie I quote again what I posted a couple of weeks ago: "'You think I was going to use my filthy Muggle father's name for ever? I, in whose veins runs the blood of Salazar Slytherin himself, through my mother's side? I, keep the name of a foul, common Muggle, who abandoned me even before I was born, just because he found out his wife was a with?'" Tom Riddle to Harry Potter. COS UK edition p.231 Geoff From eloiseherisson at aol.com Mon Nov 3 21:21:11 2003 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 16:21:11 EST Subject: ADMIN: Our Response to Yahoo's New Moderator Limit Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84046 Greetings from Hexquarters! May we have your attention for a moment, please? We, the Admin Team, would like to explain to you a minor change in our way of working. This has been imposed on us by an alteration in the service provided to us by Yahoo. Yahoo has recently imposed a limit of 15 moderators/owners for groups with no forewarning. This has forced us to make a few changes in how we do things. Moderator privileges are essential to certain tasks that the team undertake, notably approving pending messages submitted by moderated members of the group and changing the status of moderated members to unmoderated. Because of this new limit and because of the moderator privileges needed for these jobs, we've had to change our system slightly. Before this new limitation on the number of 'moderators', you would be able to go to the group online, click on Members, then Moderators, and see all members of the Admin Team listed there. Now, however, the only people listed there are those who perform the tasks of handling pending messages and de-modding list members, and this list will change from time to time, as various members of the team take on different tasks. This does not mean we now have fewer members on the Admin Team. The full team is listed in the posting guidelines (the Humongous BigFile, link on home page, http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin ). Any future changes to the team will be reflected there and you will be notified of these on list by means of an ADMIN from the team. This will not affect the functioning of the HPfGU groups in any way. Please, if you have any questions for us, about this or anything else, contact us at HPforGrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com. --The HPfGU List Administration Team, listed here for completeness: Abigail (Bookish Elf), Ali (Merry Elf), Amanda (Amandageist), David (Davey Elf), Debbie (Debby Elf), Dicentra Spectabilis (Dicey Elf), Eloise Herisson (Weezy Elf), Grey Wolf (Fluffy Elf), Jen F (Jenny Elf), Jim (ex-Jimmy Elf), Jo Serenadust (Dusty Elf), Joy (ex-Joysie Elf and Help Desk Diva), Judy (Judey Elf), Kelley (Kelley Elf, ex-Mod), Kimberly (ex-Moony Elf), Kirstini (Teeny Elf), Maria Alena (Manya Elf), Marina (Filky Elf), Melody (Aphrael Elf), Michelle (Shelly Elf), Mike (Aberforth's Goat, ex-Mod) Paul (technoGeist), Petra Pan (Penapart Elf), Phyllis (Poppy Elf), Pip (Pippy Elf), Pippin (Peppy Elf), Saitaina (Saity Elf), Sheryll (Rylly Elf, The Birthday Elf), Steve (Keeper of the Lexicon), Tabouli (Tooly Elf), Wendy (Hebby Elf). [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 3 20:49:16 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 20:49:16 -0000 Subject: Tube clues to whereabouts of Grimmauld Place (was London Locations) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84047 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" wrote: > Carolyn: > Although I still think my suggestion of the dilapidated streets to > the north and east of Kings Cross towards Highbury are a good > location for Grimmauld Place (with Caledonian Rd as the archetypal > grotty tube station, 4-5 stops from the centre of town), if it was > Mornington Crescent, this might be an amusing JKR in-joke. > > There is an extremely funny radio show called 'I'm sorry I haven't a > clue' on BBC Radio 4, and one of the regular games they play is > called 'Mornington Crescent'. Geoff: I privately emailed one of this morning's posters who referred to the programme about the anarchic rules. Your comments re Caledonian Road apply equally to Mornington Crescent; it's a grotty area. Two points however. I suggested that Camden Town was perhaps a bit more than twenty minutes from Kings Cross for a group of people who would be moving more slowly than an individual and Caledonian Road is slightly further out. I was also working on the premise that they were using the Northern Line en route to the MoM and Caledonian Road is on the Piccadilly Line. Geoff From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Mon Nov 3 21:24:55 2003 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 21:24:55 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84048 Paula Gaon suggested: >Ever since my second read of OotP and subsequent rereading of a few >chapters, can't stop thinking about Luna Lovegood. Exactly who/what is >she? When we first meet Luna on the train going to Hogwarts, she's >described as having "waist-length, dirty blond hair (not sure if dirty >refers to the condition of her hair or the color, I think it's probably the >condition due to her spacy character), very pale eyebrows and protuberant >eyes..." Of course we get a glimpse of her strange taste in accessories as >well as her distant dotty character. Now the first thing I thought about >after reviewing this description was Veela, at least part Veela-- pale >coloring, aloof manner. I think this is really interesting, but I don't agree that Luna is an otherworldly creature. I don't think she's a Veela, mostly because Veela once they reach puberty are, er, hard to mistake if there's a healthy heterosexual male within their line of sight. This applies even to those with as little as one-quarter Veela in their ancestry, e.g. Fleur. I also think the "dirty blond" refers to the color, not the condition -- and I suspect Luna's going to be much better looking in a few years. Someone on the list posited a sudden blossoming of Eloise Midgen into a beauty; I think it will be Luna and I also think (as I mentioned elsewhere) that she and Ron will have at least a temporary interest in each other -- to Hermione's chagrin. >Then, when it came to riding the Thestrals, she hopped on side saddle. Why would she need to ride side-saddle? But the quote that really raises a red flag: "Luna was already in place, sitting side-saddle, and adjusting her robes as though she did this every day." Doesn't she seem just a little too familiar with the art of Thestral riding? I don't know, but I would *think* that Luna has learned to ride (horses) sidesaddle. She's from the country, and the Wizarding World is old-fashioned. There is no mention of horses at the Burrow, and Neville's grandmother probably wouldn't let him near a horse even if she had any -- nor would I blame her. Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Add MSN 8 Internet Software to your current Internet access and enjoy patented spam control and more. Get two months FREE! http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/byoa From snapesmate at hotmail.com Mon Nov 3 21:46:14 2003 From: snapesmate at hotmail.com (snapesmate) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 21:46:14 -0000 Subject: Nagini In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84049 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mtwelovett" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Janet Anderson" < > norek_archives2 at h...> wrote: > > I am almost sure that the snake Harry released from the zoo was a boa > > constrictor from Brazil, and Nagini is a poisonous snake (possibly a cobra, > > but definitely producing venom) and her name suggests that she comes > from > > India. > > > Very good point, I had forgotten the reference in either GoF or OOP about > milking Nagini, and you are also correct about the Boa Constrictor. So I > guess that negates the two snakes being the same. I had envisioned Nagini > being more of a constrictor size, than what I think of for something like a > cobra, but I know very little about snakes, so don't know how big a Cobra > could get really. > Mtwelovett The king cobra is the world's longest poisonous snake. The king cobra is unique among snakes in that it makes a nest for its eggs, scraping up leaves and other debris in which to deposit them, and remains in the nest until the young hatch. It averages 3.7 m (12 ft) in length but is known to grow to 5.5 m (18 ft). It is a thin snake, olive or brown in color, with bronze eyes. It is found in the Philippines, Malaysia, southern China, Burma, and the Malay Peninsula. The other cobra of Asia is known variously as the common, Asian, Indian, or spectacled cobra (due to the eyeglass-shaped pattern on its skin). It seldom reaches a length of more than 1.8 m (6 ft). The hood of the Asian cobra is, proportionately, much larger than that of the king cobra and is usually yellow to brown, with a black-and-white spectacle pattern on top and two black and white spots on the lower surface. This snake causes thousands of deaths each year in India, where it is regarded with religious awe and are seldom killed. It ranges from the eastern shore of the Caspian Sea to China and Malaysia. Lynnette, who thinks Snape IS a good guy, even though he does not seem like a "nice" guy! From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 3 22:20:24 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 22:20:24 -0000 Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) In-Reply-To: <20031103204919.74035.qmail@web40014.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84050 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Paula Gaon wrote: > 3Nov03 > Ever since my second read of OotP and subsequent rereading of a few chapters, can't stop thinking about Luna Lovegood. Exactly who/what is she? Then, after all the action fighting the Death Eaters, we aren't told which spell hit Luna, but are told that > she "went flying throught the air,...hit a desk, slid over it's surface and onto the floor, and on the other side where she lay sprawled , as still as Hermione." Sounds pretty serious, but Hermione landed in the hospital wing as a patient, Luna didn't. This fact is casually revealed when we're informed that Luna dropped in to visit. (Bloomsbury Ed. page 746) IMHO, Luna is some order of being, or combination, not totally human. I see her decision to join forces with H/R/H, the only non-Gryffindor, as a foreshadowing to the subsequent revelation of an entire new "ethnic group" in the WW that we so far haven't met. Anybody pick up any hints in canon, or have ideas? > This has been posted before, but could she be a werewolf? Her name, like Lupin's, is suggestive. Remember Peeves's jingle, "Loony loopy Lupin" ? Werewolves are apparently strongly resistant to magic, since FBAWTFT lists them as known wizard killers. Pippin From evil_sushi2003 at hotmail.com Mon Nov 3 22:12:20 2003 From: evil_sushi2003 at hotmail.com (evil_sushi2003) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 22:12:20 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Penseive In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84051 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Robert Jones" wrote: > In OOTP Snape put three memories in the Pensieve, and I was thinking > what the other two might be -- might he be trying to hide whether he > was a double agent spying for LV? something more about Lily? -- and > whether Harry would be able to learn more from the past. ES Hmm... Ive often wondered about the other two memories in Snape's pensieve... I would expect the three memories to be kept hidden would be 1) showing reason's for Snape's deep hatred of James, Sirius,(the one which we've seen in OotP) 2) showing the turning point whcih effected Snape enough to spy for the order (i'm thinking along the lines of using a forbidden curse on someone he cared for/ knew was completely innocent/ had a deep respect for) 3) probably some 'adult' stuff... need I say anymore >But then I > thought that since Snape wouldn't be giving Harry any more > Occulmency lessons Snape wouldn't bother putting any memories he > didn't want Harry to see in there. But then I thought that if Snape > is in fact spying for the Order, he might put memories he does not > want LV to know in there before a spying mission. So the Penseive > may come up in Book6 or 7. Harry may stumble onto more knowledge of > the past if he ends up in Snape's office when Snape is on a mission. ES Thats a really good thought, that I hadn't considered... hmmm.... yeah, I could see that happening Evil Sushi From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Mon Nov 3 21:14:35 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 16:14:35 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape & Harry's Memory Perspective Question and then ... Message-ID: <142.1bb188f6.2cd81f3b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84052 Hello alison.williams at virgin.net, In reference to your comment: ? Perhaps Dumbledore was wiser than he seemed in ? giving Snape the job of teaching Harry occlumency? I think you are correct here in a way. When I first read OoP and saw this, admittedly, I thought it was a mad idea, but then it occurred to me that DD *might* have an ulterior motive. If for just one moment, Harry and Snape could relate to one another outside of their disdain for each other, DD would have been doing them both a great service. And, although it backfired, I think we still may see Snape and Harry united in the future. -Tonks From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Mon Nov 3 23:05:15 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 23:05:15 -0000 Subject: Tommy Riddle's birth (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84053 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says (and she quotes) "...Harry's famous first trip to Hogwarts by steam train from King's Cross is a journey that has a special resonance for Rowling. Her parents met on a train from London to Edinburgh, and later returned to Scotland for a secret marriage at Gretna Green. Rowling's grandmother was illegitimate, born of Scottish parents, but abandoned in a London nursing home, whose owners adopted her. She was privately schooled and, until she was 14, lawyers used to visit her every year. Whoever her parents were, one of them had money." Here's where I found it -- not a link, so cut and paste: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/1999/0199- scotlandsunday-goring.html I thought it was odd that so interesting a tidbit hadn't been more widely disseminated if true, but then if it were false, I figure she'd have gone totally ballistic about it in court. There are a couple of other interesting things in that article, like the two kids named Potter she hung out with in Bristol, and the Welsh Hell's Angels who inspired Hagrid. --JDR From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Nov 3 23:31:26 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2003 18:31:26 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84054 In a message dated 11/3/2003 4:23:45 PM Eastern Standard Time, gbannister10 at aol.com writes: Sherrie: > Incidentally, do we even have evidence in canon that Riddle's mum & dad were > married? > > Sherrie I quote again what I posted a couple of weeks ago: "'You think I was going to use my filthy Muggle father's name for ever? I, in whose veins runs the blood of Salazar Slytherin himself, through my mother's side? I, keep the name of a foul, common Muggle, who abandoned me even before I was born, just because he found out his wife was a with?'" Tom Riddle to Harry Potter. COS UK edition p.231 Sherrie again: Thanks for that - but IMHO, that's only canon that Tom BELIEVED they were married. He could as easily be mistaken in that belief. (I'm not saying they weren't - just that it's a grey area.) Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net Tue Nov 4 00:04:22 2003 From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 00:04:22 -0000 Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84055 Paula Gaon wrote: > > Ever since my second read of OotP and subsequent rereading > of a few chapters, can't stop thinking about Luna Lovegood. > Exactly who/what is she? > Pippin suggested: > This has been posted before, but could she be a werewolf? > Her name, like Lupin's, is suggestive. Remember Peeves's > jingle, "Loony loopy Lupin" ? Werewolves are apparently strongly > resistant to magic, since FBAWTFT lists them as known wizard > killers. Now me (Wendy): Hmnh. I like this. And it just might add a bit of something to your Evil!Lupin theory. One of the most oft-stated reasons that people don't like Evil!Lupin is that it would mean that JKR took a character who has been subject to so much predjudice (ie the persecution Lupin has suffered by being a werewolf), and then make all that prejudice turn out to have been justified. Well, if JKR wants to show that werewolves really can be good, perhaps Luna is the good one who defies the stereotypes. Which means Remus could be evil without JKR having look like she's saying all stereotypes *are* justified. :-) Wendy From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 00:12:37 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 00:12:37 -0000 Subject: Nagini In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84056 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Astrid Wootton wrote: > A week or so ago, PK says > <<< > Pippin says > > Or maybe there's something special about Nagini herself? I'm > > thinking of the Black Riders' steeds in LOTR, able to endure their > > undead riders though all other animals panic in their presence. > > > Astrid says > Could Nagini turn out to be the snake that Harry released at the > zoo? bboy_mn: I'm going with Astrid and saying that Nagini is not a normal snake. There are large venomous snake, but nothing in the size range of Pythons or Boas. There are however mythical serpents that are frequently classified as a variety of dragon. These mythical serpents unlike dragon, usually have no legs or at most, two legs. Here is a link to the 'Here Be Dragons' sight with some examples of serpent type mythyical creatures. (Wyvern, Amphiptere, Wyrm, Lindworm/Lindorm, Ouroboros, etc..) Of these, the Wyrm is the most likely. While these are dragons, and JKR has never mention this type of dragon, they do set some precedent for the existance of mythical serpents. http://www.draconian.com/whatis/whatis.htm Just a thought. bboy_mn From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 00:51:28 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 00:51:28 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: <6C4FE598-0E1D-11D8-8A81-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84057 Well, well, well. Could it be that we've finally discovered Kneasy's soft spot he's been trying to hide with that hard, cynical, suspicious shell of his? A sentimental streak-how sweet! wrote: > Molly seems to have been on the receiving end of some hard words > recently, all of them from female posters. I wonder why? Laura: Maybe because we're the ones who have to work out what it means to be a mother. Men have their own job to do about parenting but that's not the discussion here. We can all agree that in the western world, anyhow, the lives and roles of women have been radically opened over the past generation or so. We're all figuring out what it means, societally and personally. Kneasy: > The WW is highly traditional, including the portrayals of women. There seems to be a strict divide; > what might be called career types with no apparent families > (MacGonagall, Skeeter) and the home based (Molly, Petunia) with no > career. No compromise or blending of the two so far as I can see. > > I feel that I understand Molly perfectly. She is the archetype of the traditional English mum, a species that is rapidly disappearing as more and more wives return to work as soon as practicable after producing a family. > Certain traits are essential to claim membership - family comes first, always; children never really become adults, even if they are 35 and settled down, they are still their children and likely to be the recipients of advice or censure, wanted or not, appropriate or not. Approval or acceptance of outsiders is conditional and will be withdrawn abruptly if unacceptable behaviour is detected or even suspected.Daughters are generally treated with a light touch but sons, that's different. > > Sons are naturally gullible and totally incapable of looking after themselves. When young they will be led astray by manipulative friends, when older they become targets for some designing tart. No woman is really good enough to deserve their son, but usually they manage to bite their lip and somehow refrain from pointing out the glaringly obvious faults this child-snatcher exhibits. > Of course, in these days of personal growth and self- actualisation they are generally scorned. But for generation after generation they ruled supreme. They knew that 'family' concerned the group and took priority; any back-sliding into 'self' was potentially dangerously anti-family and was viewed with extreme suspicion. > > Recognise any of Molly in there? Thought so. > > In these terms Harry is an honorary son and as such should be > protected from being led astray (Ron and the flying Ford Anglia), from designing females (possibly Hermione) and from unsuitable influences (Sirius). > > Molly is not intellectual. Caring and worrying is much more > fundamental than mere intellect. Gut instinct rules. Things are in > simple black and white, good and bad. Anything, real or imagined, that poses a risk to her offspring (including Harry) is bad and must merit objections even if a coherent argument cannot be formed. > > Could you ever see her reaching an accommodation with Sirius over > Harry? I can't. Laura: Oh my-you have bitten off a mouthful here, haven't you? Well, this isn't the time or place to get into the intricacies of feminist theory and practice. And I'm in no position to argue with your portrayal of the traditional English mum. Just a few thoughts as regards what you have to say in the contect of HP: The stereotype you describe has good and bad traits, imo. Some of the good traits become bad when taken to extremes. It is *not* cute, loving or desirable to treat your grown children as emotionally dependent all their lives. If this is where Molly is headed, that's bad news. I don't think her kids will put up with it. It is *not* desirable to lose your identity in your family. Women who are mothers, even full time mothers (like me) have to have some sort of independent emotional and/or intellectual lives to be healthy and balanced human beings. The notion that a woman would do nothing with her life but be a mother is a relatively new one to civilization. For most of human history, women had other time-consuming, laborious tasks to do as well as caring for children. Those tasks were part of what was necessary for survival-food gathering and preparation, making and repairing clothing, as well as whatever income-producing work they had to do. The fierce instinct to protect the family from a hostile world is an ancient one, and was necessary to insure family survival, but to suggest that this level of insularity is still necessary is, I think, wrong. There's no question that Molly and Arthur have done something right- they have 7 kids and 6 of them are admirable. There's also no question that Molly is loving and generous to Harry. She does and says what she does and says out of genuine caring and fondness for him. My feeling about her, though, is that she's too invested in her role as mom and has nothing else to help her form an identity. That's why she goes overboard with her reactions sometimes. She seems threatened when Harry shows understandable and appropriate affection for Sirius. But she should have known that he could give Harry things she couldn't, and vice versa. Sirius can't hug Harry "like a mother"; Molly can't identify with Harry's feelings of being trapped and isolated. I think Sirius could easily have shared Harry with Molly. The problem is hers, not his. No mother can be everything to her children, and thinking that is a sure recipe for disaster. It is rather interesting that JKR would portray such a traditional societal structure. The only working mother we hear about is Hermione's mom, but we don't know her at all. (Besides, she's a muggle.) Obviously this doesn't square with JKR's own personal experience. I don't think that we can take it as an endorsement of any particular societal model, though. Several posters have observed that the WW is traditional, even old-fashioned, in many ways, and this is a significant one. And a number of essays as well as posts and discussions at Nimbus centered on whether the HP books can be seen as feminist or not, just because of the ways female characters are presented. Maybe JKR, as an author already trying to create a very complex world, just decided not to bring in the kinds of gender issues we're talking about here. It may just be a default decision-this social setup is supposed to be a neutral background so as not to distract from the subject we're looking at. (Does that make sense?) This thread has included a number of different descriptions of mothering styles. I'm not going to say that any one is right and all the others are wrong. We all bring different sets of skills, perspectives and experiences to our parenting, and none of us is perfect. (I'm sure not-just ask my kids and they'll tell you in detail what my failings are!) What works for one child may not work for your next one. It's a great mystery, parenting is. I don't think Molly is naturally malicious or intentionally overprotective. I just think she needs to get out more and get a life of her own. Laura, who's still trying to figure it out after 18 years and knows she still has a lot to learn From nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 00:37:33 2003 From: nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com (nkittyhawk97) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 00:37:33 -0000 Subject: Fidelius (Re: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4, Number Twelve, Grimmauld Place) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84058 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mtwelovett" wrote: > I'm curious though as to who performed the > charm? ~~nkityhawk: I don't think there's any evidence in canon as to WHO put the charm on, but whoever it was *knew* that it had been changed to Peter being the secret-keeper. So it's either Sirius, Peter (which I highly doubt since he IS the secret keeper) or someone that's dead. I always liked the idea of it being Lily who performed the charm. We know that she was good at charms, and wouldn't it be fitting that the only other person who knew about Peter was the one who died because of it? I'm sure it's possible to perform the charm on yourself (along with james and Harry), so it *could* have been Lily. ~~Just my contribution to the pool of theories floating around out there. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Nov 4 00:58:36 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 00:58:36 -0000 Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) In-Reply-To: <20031103204919.74035.qmail@web40014.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84059 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Paula Gaon wrote: > Ever since my second read of OotP and subsequent rereading of a >few chapters, can't stop thinking about Luna Lovegood. Exactly >who/what is she? When we first meet Luna on the train going to >Hogwarts, she's described as having "waist-length, dirty blond hair >(not sure if dirty refers to the condition of her hair or the >color, I think it's probably the condition due to her spacy >character), very pale eyebrows and protuberant eyes..." Jen: Luna is a very fascinating character. Paula mentioned later Luna could be another type of 'being' or from a new ethnic group--I've never thought of that and it could be a possibility. I've got a few other theories about her. One, her eyes: "He could see the bat-winged horses reflectd in her wide, silvery eyes." They are also described as "misty" as well. (OOTP, chap. 10, p. 199). Now it may be a coincidence, but the only other person with misty, silvery eyes is Ollivander: "Mr. Ollivander moved closer to Harry...Those silvery eyes were a bit creepy." (SS, chap. 5, p. 82). And later in the chapter, "Harry could see himself reflected in those misty eyes." Another similarity between Ollivander and Luna is their remarkable ability to discern information about other people's character without attaching emotional judgements. Ollivander must use this skill to assist people in finding the correct wand, and we see Luna intuit Harry's needs, particularly, when he first sees the thestrals and at the end when she talks with him about the Veil. Initially I thought Ollivander and Luna were related along her mother's side and Luna will be the heir apparent to the Ollivander wand dynasty! But perhaps they could be another type of magical being instead, some form of 'intuitive beings'. I'm just not sure why JKR would introduce a new group so late. I think of both of them as *true* seers, using intuition to guide them and make decisions. And since Luna is in Ravenclaw, my theory is that JKR is making a statement about intuition being as important as analytical ability for truw wisdom. Paula: >Later we learn that Luna's father is editor of the "Quibbler", the >alternate wizarding newspaper and believes, as does Luna, in all >sorts of strange animals that not many others do. Why would the >family believe in such? Could they have actually lived among such >strange beings and are just trying to inform the rest of > the wizarding world? IMHO, Luna is some order of being, or >combination, not totally human. I see her decision to join forces >with H/R/H, the only non-Gryffindor, as a foreshadowing to the >subsequent revelation of an entire new "ethnic group" in the WW >that we so far haven't met. Anybody pick up any hints in canon, or >have ideas? Jen: I reviewed "Fantastic Beasts" to make sure none of the creatures Luna's mentions are in there and they aren't--If they exist, they must not be accessible to most of the population. In a way, the Lovegoods remind me of someone in the Muggle World believing in UFO's, aliens from space, etc. There's really no way to prove or disprove that theory. People say they've seen aliens and other people say it's impossible--and never the two will meet! Re: Luna and the trio. There are so many possibilities of symbolism here. I favor that Luna is Intuition to Harry's Soul, Hermione's Mind and Ron's Heart. It could also be an example of the sorting hat song--houses banding together for a common interest. From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 01:45:57 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 01:45:57 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84060 Gee. Between you and Pippin, you've pretty much eviscerated poor Sirius, haven't you? Well, no, actually. Not for me, anyhow. A lot of the objections you raise have been ably addressed by Marianne and others. I wanted to throw in a few additional thoughts. Kneasy: Oh, dear. > Can we inject a bit of realism in here please? > Just what sort of surrogate parent would Sirius be? > > He's spent 12 years in Azkaban and is a wanted criminal on the run. > He has no experience of dealing or coping with children. > He has no idea of their needs, emotional or physical. > He is rash, disruptive, argumentative, compulsive, naive and has totally unrealistic expectations of Harry. > He is not to be trusted. Laura responds: Let's remember that there was never a possibility that Sirius and Harry would live together as father and son full time. Harry was going to be at school most of the year, whatever else happened. So I wasn't trying to suggest that that really could or would happen, just bringing up the godfather thing again. I give it weight because the characters in canon seem to. Kneasy: > Just because Harry has fantasies of leaving the Dursleys does not make Sirius an ideal replacement. Harry is not to be trusted either, especially when he knows almost nothing of the true situation. What makes you think that any of the powers that be would allow Harry and Sirius to make their own arrangements (after the Shrieking Shack)? Laura responds: Ther are no ideal parental replacements, my friend. Sirius could at least give Harry his undivided attention. And yes, I think that would be just fine. To my mind, Sirius has never once suggested that Harry do anything that would put him at risk. Sirius may be careless about himself but he's just the opposite about Harry. Who knows what would have happened if Peter hadn't escaped? Fudge's best skill is covering his backside; if he thought that public opinion would condemn the MoM for what it did to Sirius, he'd have sirius pardoned on all charges faster than you can say Dumbledore for Minister". Kneasy: > He is Harry's Achilles heel; Harry can be got at through Sirius. Laura responds: That has no bearing on what kind of guardian Sirius would have been. If Harry's parents had been alive and Harry were in the same position (I know, it turns the plot upside down but bear with me- it's a hypothetical), would you advocate taking Harry away from them because they are the people he cares most about? Kneasy: Sirius is not interested in joining forces, only in being > sole mentor. Molly's parenting experience tells her that Sirius would be a disaster waiting to happen. Sirius would soon be manipulating Harry emotionally into being his (Sirius') surrogate. Harry would be dead in three weeks. Laura responds: I don't know where you get the idea that Sirius is incapable of working with other people. Canon doesn't support it-he works just fine with everyone else in the Order except Snape. Molly's parenting experience isn't relevant-she shouldn't be the one making the decision. Do the wishes of Harry's parents count for nothing? Nor do I see any proof that Sirius tried to manipulate Harry emotionally. He acknowledged that he was unhappy in GP-like that was a big surprise. So what? It didn't make Harry encourage him to leave or argue with DD. No, I think these two were a lot more willing to put themselves at risk for the sake of the other than to allow the other to risk himself. That's not manipulation-it's love. Pippin said: We have Dumbledore's assessment: "you were coming to regard Sirius as a mixture of father and brother." In real life, that's a recipe for disaster. There are all sorts of workable parenting styles, from strict to permissive, but no parent can succeed if there is any confusion about just who is the parent and who is the child. Harry keeps having to parent Sirius, trying to keep him from coming back to Britain in GoF, getting between Sirius and Snape when they quarrel in OOP, swearing not to use the gift because he doesn't want Sirius to do anything foolish. And Sirius *is* rash even in GoF: using showy non-native birds to send messages to Harry, rushing back to Britain with no clear idea of what he'll do when he gets there, breaking into a house to use the fireplace (as we learn in OOP, there are alternatives), letting himself be seen as a dog in Hogsmeade though, as OOP makes clear, Peter could have outed him at any time, starving himself to the point where he'll eat rats. Molly has trouble letting go and respecting the boundaries of her adult children. It's telling that all three of her grown sons found ways to distance themselves from the Burrow. But Sirius had trouble letting go of his own child self, and he could never have been a successful parent as long as he wanted to treat Harry as a pal. Laura responds: I don't see any canon for the assumption that Sirius treats Harry like an equal. We have Molly and Hermione's opinions on it but they're not definitive of anything. They have their own prejudices and goals too, after all. Hermione is accurate enough in her assessment of other girls' motivations, but she doesn't understand boys well at all. And Molly doesn't do much better, although she should, given her experience raising them. Harry may have felt that Sirius was a mix of father and brother-that doesn't mean Sirius felt the same about him. As for his taking care of Sirius, by age 15 any responsible kid does that now and again. When the parent is ill or busy, the kid should volunteer to step in and help. Kids by this age have begun to perceive that their parents are people with feelings, frailties and failings (wow-maybe I should start writing greeting cards!)and will begin to do things to mitigate those things. At least that's what I've experienced. You see Sirius's behavior in GoF as reckless. I don't. What was he supposed to do, keep laying on the beach and sending postcards? He knew Harry was in danger, knew what the headaches meant, knew that suspicious things were happening. He tried to fulfill his duties as godfather the best way he could. Given his situation, that forced him to take risks. I'm not sure how he could have managed to be in touch with Harry any other way. A lot of parents enter their parenting time with unresolved problems from childhood, and that doesn't doom them to being incompetent or inadequate parents. If Sirius had been able to have the adult responsibility he sought, it would, imo, have been a healing and maturing experience for him. Everyone in OoP except Harry and Remus treated Sirius like a 4 year old who couldn't be trusted around the antique crystal, and then they wondered why he was irritable. Maybe they should have tried treating him like a grownup and given him some real responsibility-at least for Harry. For 12 years his enemies kept him from fulfilling his promise to his best friends. And then when he finally gets into a position to meet his obligation, his friends step in and prevent him from doing it. Nice- very nice. From artcase at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 03:53:49 2003 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 03:53:49 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84061 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > ...snip... > Laura: > > Maybe because we're the ones who have to work out what it means to > be a mother. Men have their own job to do about parenting but > that's not the discussion here. We can all agree that in the > western world, anyhow, the lives and roles of women have been > radically opened over the past generation or so. We're all figuring > out what it means, societally and personally. > > Kneasy: > > > The WW is highly traditional, including the portrayals of women. > There seems to be a strict divide; > > what might be called career types with no apparent families > > (MacGonagall, Skeeter) and the home based (Molly, Petunia) with no > > career. No compromise or blending of the two so far as I can see. > > > > ...snip...> > Laura: > > Oh my-you have bitten off a mouthful here, haven't you? Well, this > isn't the time or place to get into the intricacies of feminist > theory and practice. And I'm in no position to argue with your > portrayal of the traditional English mum. Just a few thoughts as > regards what you have to say in the contect of HP: > > The stereotype you describe has good and bad traits, imo. Some of > the good traits become bad when taken to extremes. It is *not* > cute, loving or desirable to treat your grown children as > emotionally dependent all their lives. If this is where Molly is > headed, that's bad news. I don't think her kids will put up with > it. It is *not* desirable to lose your identity in your family. > Women who are mothers, even full time mothers (like me) have to have > some sort of independent emotional and/or intellectual lives to be > healthy and balanced human beings. > ...snip... > The problem is hers, not his. No mother can be > everything to her children, and thinking that is a sure recipe for > disaster. > > It is rather interesting that JKR would portray such a traditional > societal structure. The only working mother we hear about is > Hermione's mom, but we don't know her at all. (Besides, she's a > muggle.) Obviously this doesn't square with JKR's own personal > experience. I don't think that we can take it as an endorsement of > any particular societal model, though. Several posters have > observed that the WW is traditional, even old-fashioned, in many > ways, and this is a significant one. And a number of essays as > well as posts and discussions at Nimbus centered on whether the HP > books can be seen as feminist or not, just because of the ways > female characters are presented. Maybe JKR, as an author already > trying to create a very complex world, just decided not to bring in > the kinds of gender issues we're talking about here. It may just > be a default decision-this social setup is supposed to be a neutral > background so as not to distract from the subject we're looking at. > ...snip... Art here: I agree with Laura's assessment/questioning of JKR's intentions with Molly. Going out on a limb, perhaps JKR is portraying Molly as the "mother" she wishes she could have been. What I'm getting at here is the transition of the author from out of work and poor to the millions of dollars, nice husband, new child thing she has now. If that assesment sounds a bit harsh, consider my situation. By my moniker, some of you may think I'm male. Sorry to disappoint, but I'm a single USA mom of two. I've been homeless (Boehemian phase, prior to children) and know how it goes to be hungry a day or two. I worked hard to get where I am now (in charge of a staff of men) and wouldn't trade the life lessons learned. Nor will I subject myself to coddling and melodrama that rides on so many "hard luck" stories. That's for wimps. I work, so what. That's what so many fathers did for all of history. Now it's my turn. It is the sacrifice a parent makes for the next generation, and that is what it takes to afford the things I desire in life. I'm really waiting for some of JKR's past to surface in her books. I really hope that it doesn't manifest itself as evil. That would be a huge setback, and utterly unnecessary in this modern world. What doesn't kill us makes us stronger. IMO, JKR may think that Molly is a great mom, I am not sold. There are moms of all kinds. Ethnic, good, bad, suburban, stereotypical, super-hero, down-in-the-mud die- hards... Sirius could have been a break from the mundane old- fashioned life that is portrayed in these books. He could have been the single, hard-working, affectionate, and decent parent. We will never get that opportunity to witness the beauty of the new age of parenthood. No, instead he is killed off, accused of living through Harry, and so many other things that "make him a bad parent" I CRY INJUSTICE!!! Molly too lives vicariously through her children. What parent doesn't from time to time? Why is that ok for her, and not for Sirius? I'll tell you why... Sirius was single, Molly is not. And we think these books are about racial predudice.... Children need to be taught that both men and women need to work hard to accomplish their goals. There are no more free rides, death-til-we part-happy-endings and any person who preaches this is deluding the future. While suburban moms in mini-vans can pretend they are liberated, how many of them can claim that they are the main breadwinner? There is still a HUGE gap in what the real world out there IS and what messages we teach to our daughters. Fortunetly, HP is about a boy. Unfortunetly, the leading girl is deluged in 80's thinking. I'd write more on this, but am running long. From oneel at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 02:19:51 2003 From: oneel at yahoo.com (Tania Canedo) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 02:19:51 -0000 Subject: The Black dog In-Reply-To: <000501c3a246$a2115080$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84062 Anne wrote: > It is probably a safe bet that Harry will continue to be depressed about the > loss of Sirius, although I think he seemed rather depressed and angry > through almost the whole of OOTP anyway. What (if anything) do you suppose > will snap him out of this funk? He seemed a little better after talking to > Luna. Will he get better emotionally, or will brooding over the prophecy > all summer plunge him further into Angstland? > > Joj writes: > I'm hoping it starts with Petunia. She, well all of the Dursley's will probably notice a change in Harry. Maybe she will ask him some questions, want to know what kind of danger Harry, and so all of her family, is in. > > Reguardless, I hope to see a Harry that is more focused and will work on his relationships with his friends and the Order members. I hope he will take his school work more seriously and pay attention better in every way. > > I think we'll see a wiser and more mature Harry. Hopefully, he'll still have some innocense and not be bitter. > I'm not asking for to much, am I? > I hope with Sirius's death Harry will try to focus more, he'll know now what's Voldemort is capable of, and he'll see he could get killed, I hope he will improve his relation skills, because, let's face it, since about half of GOF he's been in a really bad mood toward everyone, he's losing respect for everyone, I'm concerned he might get isolated, and now (more than ever) he can't afford losing more friends and being alone! (Sorry for my spelling!!!!!!!!!) Tania From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 4 02:56:19 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2003 21:56:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups]Sirius quite capable was: Re: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) Message-ID: <02C60499.5EBB4846.FB552779@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84063 In a message dated 11/3/2003 8:45:57 PM Eastern Standard Time, jwcpgh at yahoo.com writes: > I don't know where you get the idea that Sirius is incapable of > working with other people. Canon doesn't support it-he works just > fine with everyone else in the Order except Snape. Molly's > parenting experience isn't relevant-she shouldn't be the one making > the decision. Do the wishes of Harry's parents count for > nothing? I wholeheartedly agree with you. Just because canon has not revealed that Sirius has any experince with children does not mean that it is fact. James and Lily, from what I take from the books, were fairly level headed. Albeit, James and Sirius's bond was formed very young; however, I highly doubt that either James or Lily would have chosen Sirius to be Harry's Godfather were he not completely capable of the job. At the time of Sirius's appointment to the post of Godfather, it would appear that Lily and James knew their lives were in danager. They thrice thwarted Voldy. I would assume, as Harry has managed to do this four times, that it took a period of time for this to happen. For a long time, there has been a lot of Sirius bashing here and in other forums and discussions of the book. I realise that it may seem as though Sirius may not have been up to the task of caring for Harry given his situation, but I stand firm in the thought that James and Lily would NOT have asked him to be such an important role in Baby Harry's life when the *knew* their time may be short were it not that Sirius was quite capable of the job. I think people are looking at Sirius from the 'now perspective' versus the 'then'. Sirius had not seen Harry since the night Lily and James died. He had not seen Harry blossom from a baby to a young man. He was obviously shocked by Harry's likeness to his father, not only in looks, but in all areas. People seem to forget that Sirius, although sometimes his actions imperfect, had been taken from Harry's life when he, too, was still young-- at least in Wizard terms- at that same time, he had also lost his best mate and most trusted friend. So, Sirius returning to see Harry, a vision of young James, may have clouded his judgements a little. Yet, I have no doubt that Sirius had a great love and affection for Harry that would have been ample grounds for Harry to have had a suitable home. Whenever Harry needed anything after Sirius's escape from Azkaban, Sirius risked life and limb to provide for Harry. Was he rash in his judgements? Sometimes, perhaps, but it was love that drove Sirius to do these things. I think, taking a step back from the story and placing Sirius and Harry in a 'real life' situation similar, that it is plain Sirius would have made a wonderful gaurdian for Harry... even if they were more friends than adult child. Let us not forget that Harry has never really had a parental figure- except, I would say Dumbledore. No one has ever shown him the unconditional love at all times as Sirius has. Many children would be lucky for that. -Tonks, who will always love Sirius and think he is golden From erinellii at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 06:47:05 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 06:47:05 -0000 Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84064 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > This has been posted before, but could she (Luna Lovegood) be a werewolf? > Her name, like Lupin's, is suggestive. Remember Peeves's > jingle, "Loony loopy Lupin" ? Werewolves are apparently strongly > resistant to magic, since FBAWTFT lists them as known wizard > killers. Luna's name comes from "The Little White Horse", a book by Elizabeth Goudge that was one of JKR"s childhood Favorites. I highly doubt she is a werewolf- but wouldn't be surprised if she turned out to be some sort of wizarding royalty, a moon princess like in the book. Erin From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au Tue Nov 4 08:49:46 2003 From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 18:49:46 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited (WAS: Who Will Betray the Order? References: Message-ID: <01ab01c3a2b2$403ddba0$69984cca@Monteith> No: HPFGUIDX 84065 > > I submit that no evil character in Rowling ever gets off a good > line. Indeed, the principal difference between Impostor!Madeye > and the real Moody is that the *real* Moody is funny. Same with > memory-wiped "haven't got a sword" Gilderoy versus his former > self. > > Pippin > who can't remember that Lupin has ever said anything funny But "Well, well, well - Patronus Potter," by Lucius Malfoy at the MoM had me laughing....Arrrgghhh! Noooooo! Nox From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 4 12:53:22 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 12:53:22 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84066 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > Well, well, well. Could it be that we've finally discovered > Kneasy's soft spot he's been trying to hide with that hard, cynical, > suspicious shell of his? A sentimental streak-how sweet! > So, once again crossing swords with Laura. I had a suspicion that this post might provoke her. Let's see what a little more provocation produces. No, it's an analytical streak. Dissecting characters is part of the game and I was doing just that as a corrective to those rubbishing Molly because she did not comply with prevailing prejudices of what was fashionable behaviour in the circumstances that prevailed. > Laura: > > Oh my-you have bitten off a mouthful here, haven't you? Well, this > isn't the time or place to get into the intricacies of feminist > theory and practice. And I'm in no position to argue with your > portrayal of the traditional English mum. Just a few thoughts as > regards what you have to say in the contect of HP: > > The stereotype you describe has good and bad traits, imo. Some of > the good traits become bad when taken to extremes. It is *not* > cute, loving or desirable to treat your grown children as > emotionally dependent all their lives. Taking any behaviour to extremes is counter- productive. As to having good and bad points, show me a perfect child-rearing system applicable to all children, all parents, in all circumstances. And who said anything about cute? Escaping the all-enveloping embrace of your mum was a rite of passage necessary to achieve adulthood. It's not the children who end up emotionally dependent, it's the mother. Molly worrying about things like Bill's hair shows Molly's emotional attachment, not Bill's. I don't consider this to be an undesirable trait, more a natural maternal effect; then again I haven't read the latest trendy parenting manuals so I may be out of date. > If this is where Molly is > headed, that's bad news. I don't think her kids will put up with > it. It is *not* desirable to lose your identity in your family. > Women who are mothers, even full time mothers (like me) have to have > some sort of independent emotional and/or intellectual lives to be > healthy and balanced human beings. I don't question your right to choice, I do dispute your contention that yours is the only correct choice for all women and that non- compliance signifies irredeemable descent into vegetablehood. I was under the impression that the feminist agenda was about expanding choice rather than imposing a new rigid orthodoxy. Offering a choice is not compatible with imposing a dictat. Or am I wrong? Laura: > The notion that a woman would do nothing with her life but be a > mother is a relatively new one to civilization. Is this how you see Molly? Thinking about it, maybe it's true. Seven kids, each of them totally dependent until they are, say, of school age would take a fair chunk of years and commitment. But if you want or end up with a family that large, what is the alternative? There is none. The home is it. Probably explains her fantasies about Lockhart. This new notion (in our world) is the result of low child mortality more than anything else. Near where I live (a country town) there is an old graveyard. The number of gravestones marking children under 5 out- numbers adults by 3:1. By that reckoning, a hundred years ago perhaps two of Molly's brood would have got to Hogwarts. That would have given her much more opportunity to engage in fun activities outside the family. Laura: > The fierce instinct to protect the family from a hostile > world is an ancient one, and was necessary to insure family > survival, but to suggest that this level of insularity is still > necessary is, I think, wrong. > IMO the world should always be considered as potentially hostile. Neither Nature nor individuals outside the circle of knowledge can be accepted as automatically benign. To act otherwise is to be a new Candide. Consider, Molly *knows* it is a hostile world out there. Voldy is on the prowl again and he *kills*. He also has hidden allies. Her family is associated with Voldy's prime target. It's not insularity, it's fear. Laura: > My feeling about her, though, is that she's too invested in > her role as mom and has nothing else to help her form an identity. > That's why she goes overboard with her reactions sometimes. She > seems threatened when Harry shows understandable and appropriate > affection for Sirius. Oh, Molly has an identity, she is not a blank, a cipher. Identity is nothing to do with complying with an observers stereotype of what she should be. The traditional mum was not weak or ineffectual. An assault on the family and you have a tigress on your hands. Molly does not trust Sirius and Sirius has done nothing to engender trust. She suspects him and his motives. Justifiably. Harry may need a father figure, but is Sirius it? An escapee who has spent 90% of his adult life in goal, who was indirectly responsible for the deaths of Harry's parents, who was indirectly responsible for Harry being attacked by Dementors and who comes from a family of supremacists? You may make excuses for Sirius, Molly won't. He is a danger. He cannot be trusted to keep Harry safe and that is the only criterium that matters. Group hugs and male bonding are irrelevant compared to that. Laura: > Several posters have > observed that the WW is traditional, even old-fashioned, in many > ways, and this is a significant one. And a number of essays as > well as posts and discussions at Nimbus centered on whether the HP > books can be seen as feminist or not, just because of the ways > female characters are presented. Maybe JKR, as an author already > trying to create a very complex world, just decided not to bring in > the kinds of gender issues we're talking about here. It may just > be a default decision-this social setup is supposed to be a neutral > background so as not to distract from the subject we're looking at. > (Does that make sense?) > Hmm. Must all books be considered in the light of feminism? How boring that would be. As well as being totally inappropriate. Half the population disregarded to please the other half. Brainwash 'em early, is that the idea? Acceptable stereotypes only, otherwise the crusade is threatened? Can't be very sure of your ground if that's the case. Kneasy Always willing to differ From patnkatng at cox.net Tue Nov 4 13:07:25 2003 From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 13:07:25 -0000 Subject: Nagini In-Reply-To: <000901c3a231$75fcb9e0$3192aec7@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84067 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" wrote: *snippage* > it can be logically deduced that Nagini is most likely a female King Cobra. Katrina: I think you're on to something, Iggy. The name "Nagini" always put me in mind of Kipling's "Rikki Tikki Tavi." There, the female cobra was named, "Nagaina." I think there's enough similarity to be comparable. And she was clearly portrayed in the story as Evil. In fact, far more deadly and dangerous than her mate. "Now I have Nagaina to settle with, and she will be worse than five Nags" For any who are interested, the complete text can be found at http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/usr/mongoose/www/rtt.html Hasn't Kipling been referenced before in discussing JKR? I seem to remember that he was. Katrina From pmah4600 at mail.usyd.edu.au Tue Nov 4 14:14:49 2003 From: pmah4600 at mail.usyd.edu.au (The Kirk) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 14:14:49 -0000 Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84068 My opinion on Luna in terms of the narrative and symbolism is as the "anti-Hermione". There is a physical similarity in that they are both characterised by their hair (Hermione's is bushy, and Luna's is dirty blond). Luna is in Ravenclaw (where some think Hermione *should* be), yet she doesn't appear to have the same rationality as others in her house. Hermione is guilty of being too rigid in her thoughts- when it comes time to "think outside the box", such as when dealing with the Devil's Snare in PS, she often fails to think properly, and her failure to predict the Centaurs' reaction in OotP. Yet there is no doubt that her brains are invaluable to the group. Luna is the oppposite; she believes in too much, too readily. I don't know if I'm imagining things, but I recall someone saying that if there was hard evidence that somethign existed, that she wouldn't believe it. Yet her intuition and ability to empathise with Harry, which is something Hermione couldn't achieve with brain power, are things Harry is only just beginning to realise as important Both Luna and Hermione have strengths stemming from their different perspective on knowledge and life in general. But in keeping with the theme of working together and breaking down boundaries, both will be of importance in the coming War, and will probably both have to learn to accomodate some of the other's traits. Roo From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 4 07:42:55 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 07:42:55 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84069 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, MadameSSnape at a... wrote: > Sherrie again: > > Thanks for that - but IMHO, that's only canon that Tom BELIEVED they were > married. He could as easily be mistaken in that belief. > > (I'm not saying they weren't - just that it's a grey area.) > Geoff: I think you're splitting hairs here. If Tom had gone to the trouble to find out about his family (even only with revenge in mind perhaps), then I would have thought that he would have covered this angle. Surely you're not expecting Voldemort to produce a marriage certificate from his back pocket? :-) From belijako at online.no Tue Nov 4 09:23:36 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 09:23:36 -0000 Subject: Snape and the Penseive In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84070 Bobby Jones wrote: Harry may stumble onto more knowledge of > the past if he ends up in Snape's office when Snape is on a mission. Me: Do you really think Harry will risk an unauthorized dip into Snape's memories again after the beating he got last time? :-) Berit From notjustone at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 12:01:49 2003 From: notjustone at yahoo.com (John and Peg) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 04:01:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape and the Penseive In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031104120149.72781.qmail@web14410.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84071 evil_sushi2003 wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Robert Jones" wrote: > In OOTP Snape put three memories in the Pensieve, and I was thinking > what the other two might be -- might he be trying to hide whether he > was a double agent spying for LV? something more about Lily? -- and > whether Harry would be able to learn more from the past. ES Hmm... Ive often wondered about the other two memories in Snape's pensieve... I would expect the three memories to be kept hidden would be 1) showing reason's for Snape's deep hatred of James, Sirius,(the one which we've seen in OotP) 2) showing the turning point whcih effected Snape enough to spy for the order (i'm thinking along the lines of using a forbidden curse on someone he cared for/ knew was completely innocent/ had a deep respect for) 3) probably some 'adult' stuff... need I say anymore >But then I > thought that since Snape wouldn't be giving Harry any more > Occulmency lessons Snape wouldn't bother putting any memories he > didn't want Harry to see in there. But then I thought that if Snape > is in fact spying for the Order, he might put memories he does not > want LV to know in there before a spying mission. So the Penseive > may come up in Book6 or 7. Harry may stumble onto more knowledge of > the past if he ends up in Snape's office when Snape is on a mission. I think that one of the memories is the reason why DD trusts Snape so much. IMO only Snape (and others like him) would think that someone else knowing this would be considered a weakness. Notjust1 --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From park0188 at flinders.edu.au Tue Nov 4 12:26:50 2003 From: park0188 at flinders.edu.au (Richard Parker) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 22:56:50 +1030 Subject: The Black Dog In-Reply-To: <1067947570.5436.92726.m12@yahoogroups.com> References: <1067947570.5436.92726.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <1067948810.3fa79b0a64b87@imap.flinders.edu.au> No: HPFGUIDX 84072 Thanks for the cultural explanation of the grim. I agree that Harry is clearly depressed for the majority of OOTP, and even suicidal at one point in Dumbledores office after Sirius' death. I however do not expect harry to recover quickly from such an event, and I think his darker temperament will remain with him through to the series conclusion. Once you sink to the lowest of lows as Harry surely now has done, it isn't easy to get up again as if nothing has happened and become the innocent boy he once was. His perceptions are now coloured permanently by a degree of cynicism and this is reflected through his bittering attitude. He will grow from his experiences, but how long it will take for him to move on from such tragedy is anyones guess. I just don't think it is realistic to expect a bright and bubbly harry next year. In regards to concentration, a lack of it is perhaps the biggest bane of anyone who has suffered depression, including myself. You almost think about things too much (like what if's and should have's) and have little mental capacity left for studies, work, ect. -- Richard Parker 3rd year Archaeology Student (Historical stream), Flinders University, Adelaide. "It is our choices Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities." -Albus Dumbledore From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 15:48:19 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 15:48:19 -0000 Subject: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited ) In-Reply-To: <01ab01c3a2b2$403ddba0$69984cca@Monteith> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84073 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, wrote: > > > > I submit that no evil character in Rowling ever gets off a good > > line. Indeed, the principal difference between Impostor!Madeye > > and the real Moody is that the *real* Moody is funny. Same with > > memory-wiped "haven't got a sword" Gilderoy versus his former > > self. > > > > Pippin > > who can't remember that Lupin has ever said anything funny > > But "Well, well, well - Patronus Potter," by Lucius Malfoy at the MoM had > me laughing....Arrrgghhh! Noooooo! > > Nox Laura: I thought the Snape-boggart that Remus helped Neville create was classic, myself. Maybe not a funny line as such, but definitely showing a sly sense of humor. From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 4 16:45:57 2003 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 16:45:57 -0000 Subject: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84074 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > I thought the Snape-boggart that Remus helped Neville create was > classic, myself. Maybe not a funny line as such, but definitely > showing a sly sense of humor. Seems like a case for Evil-Lupin . You know, the Lupin who stood by while Snape was being bullied by James and Sirius. The same Lupin who as a teacher at Hogwarts puts a Snape-boggart in a dress. Not very classy. Especially coming from a man who knew what Snape had to endure at Hogwarts. It's funny to the kids but not funny to Snape and Lupin surely knew that. "K" ~not totally convinced dear Lupin is evil~ ~not at all convinced McGonagall is evil~ ~lover of the great Dumbledore~ From cindysphynx at comcast.net Tue Nov 4 17:12:53 2003 From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 17:12:53 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Our Response to Yahoo's New Moderator Limit In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84075 Hi! A quick follow-up question about how all of this works from the perspective of a listmember . . . > This will not affect the functioning of the HPfGU groups in any way. If I understand correctly, an e-mail sent to the owner's mailbox goes out to everyone listed as a moderator. In the past, the entire team would receive the message in their in-boxes. Now, the only people who will receive it are the 15 people with moderator privileges. My question is this: If a member sends a question, suggestion or complaint to the owner's mailbox now, does the entire team of list administrators get that message, or do only the 15 people listed as moderators receive it? Cindy From darkthirty at shaw.ca Tue Nov 4 17:15:51 2003 From: darkthirty at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 17:15:51 -0000 Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) In-Reply-To: <20031103204919.74035.qmail@web40014.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84076 ~Paula "Griff" Gaon I see her decision to join forces with H/R/H, the only non- Gryffindor, as a foreshadowing to the subsequent revelation of an entire new "ethnic group" in the WW that we so far haven't met. Anybody pick up any hints in canon, or have ideas? dan I've posted a while ago some speculations regarding the narrative function of Luna Lovegood - something about the way she relates to HP indicating to me that she is part of Rowling's "solution" for the problem of HP as fictional character and as a real person somewhere in Rowling's past. Now, before people accuse me of going all META here, it is evident to me that the relationship between the fictional muggle world (a hyperbolized RW, in a way), the WitchWizard World (a reflection of the RW with magic trappings) and the RW are becoming the real subject of the series. Perhaps Rowling has worked out, by now, the adolescent passion behind the literary passion of HP, which she now turns her focus to. If this is the case, then a character like LL provides release from Rowling's own Hermionean retentiveness, which she has alluded to. Potentially, as well, LL provides a way to get Potter out of the closet - which is mental, perhaps physical, and obviously emotional. In some ways, Potter's anger reflects the anger that an author might feel at the death of the literary reason d'etre of a book?!?! Possibly. But, if I am correct, then what makes Luna different is that she is almost entirely RW - strangely enough a character satisfying certain fan ficcy type impulses, one one hand, but completely modelled, or rather designed, as a real-life, real person. I need to go on about this some time soon, to clarify these ideas for the group. I'm just so bloody busy with work. dan From o_caipora at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 17:27:14 2003 From: o_caipora at yahoo.com (o_caipora) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 17:27:14 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84077 "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > I think you're splitting hairs here. If Tom had gone to the trouble > to find out about his family (even only with revenge in mind > perhaps), then I would have thought that he would have covered this > angle. Surely you're not expecting Voldemort to produce a marriage > certificate from his back pocket? :-) Geoff has produced canon, and has a valid argument against quibbling. If Pop Riddle, for example, had had the marriage annulled (surely a priest could be found who would consider witchcraft cause?) it's impossible to imagine Voldemort explaining this tidbit. To Wormtail? While battling Dumbledore? It just doesn't fit. Someone who doesn't want to be married to a witch may well not want to be the father of one, either. Many men are quite willing to date women they wouldn't care to have children with. The elder Riddle rejected his wife (who he presumably knew well and had affection for) on learning of her witchcraft. It must have been far easier to reject an unmet and unknown child for that reason. Rowling doesn't "do" religion. We don't know if the Riddles (or the Weasleys, or the Potters) were married in a church or in a civil ceremony. It seems like one area where the Wizarding and Muggle worlds should intersect. In "The King of Elfland's Daughter" the priest in stumped by how to marry the King's daughter to a mortal, and Dunsany has him choose a ceremony "to marry a mermaid who has forsaken the sea." But Rowling doesn't tell us. - Caipora From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 17:29:19 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 17:29:19 -0000 Subject: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84078 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > > > I thought the Snape-boggart that Remus helped Neville create was > > classic, myself. Maybe not a funny line as such, but definitely > > showing a sly sense of humor. > > "K": > Seems like a case for Evil-Lupin . You know, the Lupin who stood > by while Snape was being bullied by James and Sirius. The same Lupin > who as a teacher at Hogwarts puts a Snape-boggart in a dress. Not > very classy. Especially coming from a man who knew what Snape had to > endure at Hogwarts. It's funny to the kids but not funny to Snape and > Lupin surely knew that. Laura: But if Snape really was Neville's worst fear, and if Neville had to make that fear laughable to make the boggart go away, what else was Remus supposed to do? He couldn't tell Neville to get another worst fear, could he? And if Snape is surprised to find that students he bullies fear him, then he's not as smart as we thought he was. > > > ~not totally convinced dear Lupin is evil~ > ~not at all convinced McGonagall is evil~ > ~lover of the great Dumbledore~ From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 4 17:46:36 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 17:46:36 -0000 Subject: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84079 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says Oh, it was classy, all right. Classy, but really, really mean. This is more *my* Lupin, and probably more the Lupin that James and Sirius knew. His mild manner hides a toughness and a sense of heedless mischief that made him a real Marauder and not just a hanger-on like Peter. He knew what Snape endured at Hogwarts, and he also knew what Snape inflicted at Hogwarts, both in his student days and as a teacher terrorizing hapless innocents like Neville Longbottom. The Lupins of the world are the seeming geeks or nerds that mysteriously never get beaten up, and nobody can figure out why the jocks are leery of him. --JDR From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 4 17:54:30 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 17:54:30 -0000 Subject: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84080 Laura: > > > I thought the Snape-boggart that Remus helped Neville create was classic, myself. Maybe not a funny line as such, but definitely showing a sly sense of humor. > > > > "K": > > Seems like a case for Evil-Lupin . You know, the Lupin who stood by while Snape was being bullied by James and Sirius. The same Lupin who as a teacher at Hogwarts puts a Snape-boggart in a dress. Not very classy. Especially coming from a man who knew what Snape had to endure at Hogwarts. It's funny to the kids but not funny to Snape and Lupin surely knew that. > > Laura: > > But if Snape really was Neville's worst fear, and if Neville had to > make that fear laughable to make the boggart go away, what else was Remus supposed to do? << The same thing he did with Harry and Hermione, whom he thought might have boggarts not suitable for a classroom demonstration. Hermione's come face to face with a basilisk, after all. I guess I have to modify my theory, and say that no wicked Potterverse character ever gets off a harmless good line. Draco has a cruel sense of humor too. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 4 18:20:42 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 18:20:42 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups]Sirius quite capable was: Re: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Wom In-Reply-To: <02C60499.5EBB4846.FB552779@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84081 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: >> Let us not forget that Harry has never really had a parental figure- except, I would say Dumbledore. No one has ever shown him the unconditional love at all times as Sirius has. Many children would be lucky for that.<< Molly does show unconditional love for Harry. She demonstrates it in the Hospital Wing in GoF. As has been pointed out, Molly has a problem disbelieving what she reads. OOP shows that she hasn't gotten over it--she still accepts Lockhart as an authority. Despite all that, she never, for one moment, doubted that Harry was telling the truth about Voldemort's return, even though things would have been far easier for herself and her family if she'd accepted the Prophet's version instead. Her love, like Sirius's, is something of a mixed blessing, not least because you can't turn love on and off like a faucet. Molly can't turn off her concern for Harry just because Sirius broke out of jail, and Sirius shouldn't expect her to. She's not telling Sirius to give up Harry, she's only reminding him to be responsible, and what would be the point of her asking him, if she didn't think he could do it? As far as Molly's concerned, the advice Sirius was giving Harry in GoF is still good: he should remember that things outside the walls of Hogwarts are not his responsibility and nor is it within his power to influence them. If Sirius had stayed on that message, there's a good chance he'd still be alive. For all her faults, it's Molly who paved the way for Harry's salvation in OOP. Sirius did offer Harry unconditional love, but I'm not sure Harry could have recognized it if Molly hadn't given him hers first, at a time when Sirius was in no position to do so. And much as I adore Dumbledore, his love for Harry is not unconditional. As he sorrowfully tells Harry, he has larger calls to answer. "Yet this inconstancy is such As you too shall adore:-- I could not love thee, dear, so much, Loved I not honour more." Pippin From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 4 18:20:49 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 18:20:49 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84082 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says But why are we taking Tom's word for anything? The child's not right, as the old folks say. I think he constructed an elaborate fantasy from a few scraps of evidence. If there *was* a marriage certificate and his mother *was* an abandoned wife, why not just show up with a lawyer and a tabloid reporter? Tom Riddle cannot possibly have been the only kid stuck in an orphanage because his/her father abandoned his mother when he found out she was a witch/pregnant/the wrong religion/underage/other/all of the above, and *they* didn't turn out to be psychotic evil dark lords/ladies. --JDR From tminton at deckerjones.com Tue Nov 4 18:53:00 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 12:53:00 -0600 Subject: Hermione's boggart (Was: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited )) Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE981D@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84083 Pippen said snip************************ Hermione's come face to face with a basilisk, after all. Snip ************************** Now Tonya I don't remember Hermione's being a basilisk. I remember at the end of the school year when she is taking her DADA test her boggart is Professor McGonagall. I just finished that book for the umpteen time so it is still fresh, so could you point me to canon on her boggart being a basilisk?? Thanks!! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 19:27:37 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 19:27:37 -0000 Subject: Hermione's boggart (Was: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE981D@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84084 > Pippen said > snip************************ > Hermione's come face to face with a basilisk, > after all. > Snip ************************** > > Now Tonya > I don't remember Hermione's being a basilisk. I remember at the end of > the school year when she is taking her DADA test her boggart is > Professor McGonagall. I just finished that book for the umpteen time so > it is still fresh, so could you point me to canon on her boggart being a > basilisk?? Thanks!! Annemehr: Hermione's boggart was never a basilisk. What Pippin is referring to is that Hermione never faced the boggart in Lupin's first lesson. Perhaps Lupin didn't want her to because he was afraid it would turn into a basilisk for her (as she was petrified by one only a few months before), and he thought that would frighten the class to much. If this is indeed the reason, then Lupin guessed wrong about both Hermione's and Harry's boggarts -- hey, Pippin, can you turn that into something evil? Or --- if a boggart!dementor makes Harry hear his Mum's murder, what would a boggart!basilisk do? Annemehr From rredordead at aol.com Tue Nov 4 19:35:15 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 19:35:15 -0000 Subject: A loose end or two... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84085 > Kneasy wrote: > It's puzzled me that darling Bella didn't terminate the Longbottoms. > It's what she does best. How many survived an encounter with the DEs? Damn few so far as we know. But I can imagine a coward who can see which way the wind is blowing having second thoughts and liking the idea of being able to claim in his defence (if caught) that he had saved them from the vengeful Bella and her ever-ready AK. Now me: Always enjoy your insightful posts Kneasy, and I'm interested on what gives you then impression that Bellatrix foremost skill is Killing? I got the impression that her skills lie in the art of using pain for both information extraction, and in the forcing of her victims to do her will. Using the Cruciatus and Imperius Curses are more her 'cup of tea' than the AK. Of course that's not to say she doesn't use it. I'm sure she does and very easily, but I don't think she enjoys it as much as the others. I can see Bella positively rejoicing at the thought of Frank and Alice still alive and insane after all this time. Mandy. From notjustone at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 12:08:57 2003 From: notjustone at yahoo.com (John and Peg) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 04:08:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups]The Burrow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031104120857.21209.qmail@web14409.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84086 Does anyone know where The Burrow may be? In book 2 she starts to touch on it but I still cannot figure that out. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 18:30:10 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 18:30:10 -0000 Subject: Prefect Privileges/Powers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84087 Forgive me if this has been discussed, but I searched Fantastic Posts and couldn't locate any info. My question is...What privileges/powers do the prefects have with regard to disciplining other students? We learned in OOP that Prefects do not have power to add or deduct house points (OOP pg 625-ish). When Malfoy informs HRH of the Inquisitorial Squad having this power, Hermione responds that this will undermine the whole prefect system. While re-reading COS (again!) I noticed that Percy took 5 points from Griffindor when he caught Ron in the Moaning Myrtle's bathroom. (COS pg 157-158 approx). Do these two events conflict, or is there some way both could be true? Also, what powers do prefects have to hand out punishments, detentions or other discipline? Do we have any canon to show what a prefect actually is there for? I always looked at them as middle-men between the teachers and students--the best students lifted up and taught to be leaders. However, handing out punishments doesn't really seem to fit with that. Imagine a 5th year Hufflepuff Prefect giving detention to a 7th year Slytherin--I would hate to be that poor little Hufflepuff Just a thought... Hermowninny (Forgive me if my page numbers are wrong--I looked this up VERY late last night and noted the pages. Then, of course, I forgot to bring the note with me to work. BTW, thank heaven for jobs--without being forced to sit in front of a computer 5 hours per day at work, I wouldn't ever have time to surf.) From sydenmill at msn.com Tue Nov 4 20:12:20 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:12:20 -0000 Subject: Snape:Voldemort's faithful servant ? (again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84088 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "LIWY" wrote: LIWY wrote in post #84039: > I think there may be a chance that Snape was at the graveyard. > There's nothing against him leaving the Hogwarts grounds and > apparating from there. In addition, it's possible for him to have > used a portkey. If you're looking on from a distance, then there's > no way to tell someone who comes in by apparation vs. someone who > arrives via portkey. So the no-apparition rule doesn't really pose > much of a barrier to his (possible) presence in the graveyard. Bohcoo responds: Or, Snape could have easily slipped behind a tree, transfigured himself into a bat, flown to the graveyard, and reappeared as Snape, ready to join the circle. Bats can fly at high rates of speed, can't they? Hence the expression, "a bat out of hell." That has always meant, "fast, very very fast," hasn't it? Big grins, Bohcoo From smaragdina5 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 15:59:15 2003 From: smaragdina5 at yahoo.com (smaragdina5) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 15:59:15 -0000 Subject: Alchemy, again Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84089 It looks like John Granger, author of _The Hidden Key to Harry Potter_ and online teacher of a Harry Potter course, has a new article out: The Alchemist's Tale: Harry Potter & the Alchemical Tradition in English Literature http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/issues/16.9docs/16-9pg34.html I should really be analyzing or theorizing here, but don't have the chance to finish it till later so wanted to put the word out. Happy thinking... smaragdina5 From IrishMastermind at hotmail.com Tue Nov 4 19:34:02 2003 From: IrishMastermind at hotmail.com (Anne Geldermann) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 14:34:02 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's boggart (Was: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited )) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84090 >>Pippen said >>snip************************ >>Hermione's come face to face with a basilisk, >>after all. >>Snip ************************** > >Now Tonya >I don't remember Hermione's being a basilisk. I remember at the end of >the school year when she is taking her DADA test her boggart is >Professor McGonagall. I just finished that book for the umpteen time so >it is still fresh, so could you point me to canon on her boggart being a >basilisk?? Thanks!! > Neither was Harry's boggart Lord Voldemort. It is pretty reasonable for Lupin to guess that Hermione's boggart could be a basilisk. To most minds, a basilisk and the risk of death is much more likely to be terrifying than being told you've failed all your classes. Anne _________________________________________________________________ MSN Shopping upgraded for the holidays! Snappier product search... http://shopping.msn.com From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 20:26:20 2003 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:26:20 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups]The Burrow In-Reply-To: <20031104120857.21209.qmail@web14409.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84091 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, John and Peg wrote: > Does anyone know where The Burrow may be? In book 2 she starts to > touch on it but I still cannot figure that out. Richard here: I believe the evidence points to Devonshire. There has been some discussion of this in the past, so I recommend searching the archives, which will be faster than waiting for me to dig it all up. Richard From sydenmill at msn.com Tue Nov 4 20:34:08 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 20:34:08 -0000 Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) In-Reply-To: <20031103204919.74035.qmail@web40014.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84092 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Paula Gaon Then, after all the action fighting the Death Eaters, we aren't told which spell hit Luna, but are told that she "went flying throught the air,...hit a desk, slid over it's surface and onto the floor, and on the other side where she lay sprawled , as still as Hermione." Sounds pretty serious, but Hermione landed in the hospital wing as a patient, Luna didn't. This fact is casually revealed when we're informed that Luna dropped in to visit. (Bloomsbury Ed. page 746) IMHO, Luna is some order of being, or combination, not totally human. I see her decision to join forces with H/R/H, the only non- Gryffindor, as a foreshadowing to the subsequent revelation of an entire new "ethnic group" in the WW that we so far haven't met. Anybody pick up any hints in canon, or have ideas?< Bohcoo responds: There is also mention in OOP, ch. 35, page 795, American edition, of Luna escaping unscathed when those with her were seriously injured. This happened in the Planet Room where Ron got zapped with the giggles and Ginny suffered a broken ankle. Not a scratch on Luna: "'I think her ankle's broken, I heard something crack,' whispered Luna, who was bending over her and who alone seemed to be unhurt." I think you might be on to something. Luna does certainly have something magically unusual or special about her. I also agree with the person who recently posted that Luna might be related in some way to Ollivander. Since so many of the wizarding families are related, this wouldn't be much of a coincidence. (Apologies for not making note of this person's name. If I leave this message now to look it up, Yahoomort will vanquish this message into oblivion.) Bohcoo From tminton at deckerjones.com Tue Nov 4 20:41:57 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:41:57 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's boggart (Was: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE248D26@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84094 > Pippen said > snip************************ > Hermione's come face to face with a basilisk, > after all. > Snip ************************** > > Now Tonya > I don't remember Hermione's being a basilisk. I remember at the end of > the school year when she is taking her DADA test her boggart is > Professor McGonagall. I just finished that book for the umpteen time so > it is still fresh, so could you point me to canon on her boggart being a > basilisk?? Thanks!! Annemehr: Hermione's boggart was never a basilisk. What Pippin is referring to is that Hermione never faced the boggart in Lupin's first lesson. Perhaps Lupin didn't want her to because he was afraid it would turn into a basilisk for her (as she was petrified by one only a few months before), and he thought that would frighten the class to much. If this is indeed the reason, then Lupin guessed wrong about both Hermione's and Harry's boggarts -- hey, Pippin, can you turn that into something evil? Or --- if a boggart!dementor makes Harry hear his Mum's murder, what would a boggart!basilisk do? Annemehr Now Tonya again: Oh Thanks for explaining that!! I thought I missed something and I did!! feeling much better now!! Tonya [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From drednort at alphalink.com.au Tue Nov 4 20:44:52 2003 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 07:44:52 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Prefect Privileges/Powers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3FA8AA74.14465.4465948@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 84095 On 4 Nov 2003 at 18:30, hermowninny719 wrote: > While re-reading COS (again!) I noticed that Percy took 5 points from > Griffindor when he caught Ron in the Moaning Myrtle's bathroom. (COS > pg 157-158 approx). > > Do these two events conflict, or is there some way both could be true? Yes - if we assume that prefects have the power to take points from members of their own house, but not from members of other houses. Given the way the system at Hogwarts operates - where they seem to have 'House Prefects' (ie, Prefects are appointed by house), such a system wouldn't be unprecedented at all. It would also function as a control on prefects ensuring that they are likely to only punish reluctantly and moderately, because if they go too far, they will suffer themselves. With Slytherins around (especially!) you'd need to have some sort of control like that. > Also, what powers do prefects have to hand out punishments, > detentions or other discipline? Do we have any canon to show what a > prefect actually is there for? As far as I can recall, we never see a Prefect hand out any punishment besides taking points away. And presumably they are there for similar reasons as to why they exist in other schools. > I always looked at them as middle-men between the teachers and > students--the best students lifted up and taught to be leaders. > However, handing out punishments doesn't really seem to fit with > that. Imagine a 5th year Hufflepuff Prefect giving detention to a > 7th year Slytherin--I would hate to be that poor little Hufflepuff Bear in mind, Prefects are *real*. There are plenty of schools that *really* have them. I was one of them at my school. There's no single model for how prefects function in a school - in some cases they can be as you describe - the best students raised up to leadership, and as middle-men. But that's only one model. And handing out punishments can be part of the job. Hogwarts situation is moderately unusual in that most schools that have prefects (not all) draw them only from the most senior students. But let me tell you - disciplining people your own age can be difficult enough, so I wouldn't envy that Hufflepuff either - but also bear in mind that a Prefect should have the system backing them up. On one occasion, I stepped between a boy who was much bigger than I, and much stronger than I, and a younger boy he was attacking. He could have pounded me to dust - but I relied on the fact that he knew that if he hit me, he was gone. The institutional fury of the entire school would have descended upon him. That backup made it work - and it could work even with regards younger prefects. But, personally, I think in a system like Hogwarts, the older prefects should be looking out for the younger ones, and doing everything they can to make sure that the younger ones don't have to deal with people older than them under normal circumstances. As Ron and Hermione find, it isn't easy to control those like Fred and George even if they are in your own house (-8. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 21:17:54 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 21:17:54 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups]The Burrow In-Reply-To: <20031104120857.21209.qmail@web14409.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84096 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, John and Peg wrote: > Does anyone know where The Burrow may be? In book 2 she starts to touch on it but I still cannot figure that out. > > John & Peg bboy_mn: Well, we don't know for sure because the book doesn't give us enough information, and JKRowling has only hinted at it's location; she has never directly confirmed it. The hint was that the name Ottery St Catchpole was inspired by Ottery St Mary. It is beleived to be in Devon which is in the southwest of England. I think the major city in central Devon is Exeter, another major coastal city in south Devon would be Torquay. In Devon, just north of the coastal city Sidmouth, is a town called Ottery St. Mary. The Ottery part, implies that the village is on the Otter River; which it is. Just outside of Ottery St. Mary is a real historic farm called Burrow Hill Farm. Burrow Hill Farm does have a website and allow visitors to the farm, I've been to the site, but couldn't find the link again. Keep in mind, if you search the web for the Burrow Hill Farm site, that there is also a Burrow Hill Farm in Somerset, England. These are all pretty strong clues that Devon is the location. However, we remember that in one episode of HP series, Molly takes the whole crew from the Burrow to King's Cross Station in three muggle taxis. It's over 100 miles (130-140) from Ottery St Mary to central London, that would make for an extremely expensive taxi ride. Personally, I think the Ministry picked up the bill for the taxis because they wanted to protect Harry. Others say this taxi ride would be too expensive for the Weasleys (remember THREE taxis), and use it as proof that the Burrow is closer to London. Side Note: tinyurl.com doesn't seem to be working any more, so I have used an alternate URL redirection service, makeashorterlink.com . At either service, simply enter a long web link and it will give you a short link as a substitute; very convinient. Maps to location of Ottery St Mary and Burrow Hill Farm- Ottery St. Mary- http://www.multimaps.com/map/browse.cgi?X=300000&Y=100000&width=500&height=300&client=public&gride=&gridn=&srec=0&coordsys=gb&addr1=&addr2=&addr3=&pc=&scale=1000000&advanced=&multimap.x=286&multimap.y=166 Alternate link- http://makeashorterlink.com/?P2C812076 Burrow Hill Farm- http://www.multimaps.com/map/browse.cgi?X=310000&Y=95000&width=500&height=300&client=public&gride=&gridn=&keepicon=false&coordsys=gb&addr1=&addr2=&addr3=&pc=&advanced=&scale=25000&downright.x=9&downright.y=10 ALternate Link- http://makeashorterlink.com/?N1E832076 Hope these map links work. bboy_mn From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Tue Nov 4 21:35:37 2003 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 21:35:37 -0000 Subject: Working parents (was "I know Molly.....") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84097 Kneasy: > The WW is highly traditional, including the > portrayals of women. There seems to be a > strict divide; what might be called career > types with no apparent families (MacGonagall, > Skeeter) and the home based (Molly, Petunia) > with no career. No compromise or blending of > the two so far as I can see. Laura: > It is rather interesting that JKR would > portray such a traditional societal structure. > The only working mother we hear about is > Hermione's mom, but we don't know her at all. > (Besides, she's a muggle.) Obviously this > doesn't square with JKR's own personal > experience. I don't think that we can take it > as an endorsement of any particular societal > model, though. Several posters have observed > that the WW is traditional, even old-fashioned, > in many ways, and this is a significant one. I would suggest that the lack of portrayals of working mothers has less to do with a portrayal of the WW as "traditional" than with a strong dichotomy in Rowling's writing between professional and family life. (I will leave others to explore the implications of such a dichotomy for feminist theory :) ). Unless some plot device is being served, we rarely learn anything about the family status of people whom we see in a work context (famously so in the case of the Hogwarts staff, see http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2001/0301-comicrelief-staff.htm and search for "spouse"), or about the jobs of people whom we see in a family context. As a result, there are nearly as few working fathers portrayed as working mothers. Here is the list of working parents I was able to compile with a modicum of effort -- two witches and five wizards, plus Mr. Dursley and the Grangers: Vernon Dursley (executive) Arthur Weasley (bureaucrat) Hermione's mom (dentist) Hermione's dad (dentist) Alice Longbottom (auror) Frank Longbottom (auror) Mr. Lovegood (editor) Barty Crouch Sr. (not much of a father, some would say!) Madam Edgecomb (bureaucrat) (Marietta's mom) Amos Diggory (bureaucrat) Unless I'm mistaken, there is exactly one confirmed stay-at-home witch in the books, and that is Molly Weasley. Given the infrequency with which Rowling couples professional and family descriptions, it is ridiculous to assume (as Kneasy appears to do) that a witch or wizard is childless just because we have not heard anything about his or her family. It is even more unreasonable to limit that assumption to women. If we look generally at what we see of the working world in the books, most occupations in the WW seem to be staffed by women and men in roughly equal proportions (contrary to what one might call the "traditional" (ahem) approach). See, for example, the discussion of the Hogwarts staff on the Lexicon (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/hogwarts_teachers.html); compare the number of male/female proprietors in Diagon Alley. Within the Ministry and on the Wizengamot there also appears to be significant female representation, although I believe more male characters have been shown. Witches and wizards were equally represented among the Hogwarts founders ten centuries ago. Given that observation, unless there is a huge childless population in the WW, it is most reasonable to infer that many of those working witches are mothers. That Rowling chooses not to play up that fact is simply a matter of writing style, or perhaps an effort to remain apolitical. -- Matt From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 21:36:04 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 21:36:04 -0000 Subject: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84098 > > Laura: > > > > But if Snape really was Neville's worst fear, and if Neville had to > > make that fear laughable to make the boggart go away, what > else was Remus supposed to do? << > > The same thing he did with Harry and Hermione, whom he > thought might have boggarts not suitable for a classroom > demonstration. Hermione's come face to face with a basilisk, > after all. > Pippin Laura: Remus could have avoided the problem if he'd known what Neville was going to say, but he didn't. So once he'd asked Neville the question, he had to go forward with the exercise. Unless you're suggesting that Remus knew perfectly well what Neville would say and set him up...I don't believe that myself but all you ESE!Lupin fans will love it. From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 21:37:13 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 21:37:13 -0000 Subject: Prefect Privileges/Powers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84099 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermowninny719" wrote: > > ...edited... > > My question is...What privileges/powers do the prefects have with > regard to disciplining other students? > > ...edited... > > While re-reading COS (again!) I noticed that Percy took 5 points > from Griffindor when he caught Ron in the Moaning Myrtle's bathroom. > (COS pg 157-158 approx). > > Do these two events conflict, or is there some way both could be > true? > > > > Just a thought... > Hermowninny bboy_mn: Percy taking points off would very much seem to conflict with the most recent book (OoP), however, we only know that Percy SAID he was taking points off. We don't know that the points were actually lost. Remember, this occurred during Harry's second year at Hogwarts, and Percy may have been banking on the fact that Harry and Ron didn't completely understand the rules of the Prefect system. >From the latest book it would seem that Percy's only real option was to give Harry and Ron detention, and given how the rest of the school felt about Harry at the time, he may not have had the heart to do that. So, just to scare them, he may have threatened them with the loss of house points. Just a thought. bboy_mn From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 21:46:00 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 21:46:00 -0000 Subject: OT: The Burrow - NOTE TO GROUP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84100 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > Maps to location of Ottery St Mary and Burrow Hill Farm- > > Ottery St. Mary- > http://www.multimaps.com/map/browse.cgi?X=300000&Y=100000&width=500&height=300&client=public&gride=&gridn=&srec=0&coordsys=gb&addr1=&addr2=&addr3=&pc=&scale=1000000&advanced=&multimap.x=286&multimap.y=166 > > Alternate link- > http://makeashorterlink.com/?P2C812076 > bboy_mn: I just noticed that for the first time in the few years I've been here, my long web links actually worked. The secret to getting a link longer than the right margin to work is to UNCHECK the box next to '[]Wrap Message Text' that is found just above the SEND button when you are composing a new message. This won't stop the text from wrapping at the margin when viewed as a post on the screen but it will stop Yahoo from inserting a Carriage Return at the end of each line where the text wraps. With no Carriage Return, the link becomes continuous unbroken text, and with the text unbroken, the link also is unbroken. So, if you are posting a web link that is longer than the rigth margin, remember to UNcheck the '[]Wrap Message Text' box before you SEND the message. If you are using an email program, you will also have the option somewhere in the program to tell the it not to wrap long lines. Just a thought. bboy_mn From sydenmill at msn.com Tue Nov 4 21:52:20 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 21:52:20 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited (WAS: Who Will Betray the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84101 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote in post #83919: > A forlorn shout echoes across Theory Bay, "Elkins! Elkins! Are you > here? Elkins! They've forgotten EverSoEvil!McGonagall!" Bohcoo comments: This completely intrigued me, so I went back and read Elkins's staggeringly insightful post #39470 and the threads it spawned. (And, hat-tip to Erin here, no slouch yourself!) Want a good case of the cold-chills-creeps? Go for a stroll down that memory lane. Whew. Forgotten ESE McGonagall? Not anymore. Okay, so I'm convinced: Minerva is evil to the core. She is the spurned lover of Voldemort (or, as she was first to call him, Lord Thingy. . .):) and inside the bun she always wears is a single lock of his hair that she lovingly cut from his head when he still had hair instead of scales. Unfortunately, poor Minerva has no idea the new form her precious Tommy has assumed in order to enjoy vertical motion again. Will she still pine for him when she sees him again? (And we thought we had it bad going to our high school reunions and being shocked at the stereotypical football captain still working at the local gas station or the homecoming queen in a snug-fitting size 22 dress.) And another mystery: Why did she latch onto Hermoine to mentor? What would her darling Tom Riddle think of her selection of a student who is 100% Muggle? Why would McGonagall mentor such a student UNLESS (insert organ music here. . .) she was so hurt by Tom Riddle ditching her way back then that she rushed her loyalties over to Dumbledore in a fit of blind revenge -- and -- wants to hurt him back by taking a student who embodies everything he loathes and making her into the best witch Hogwarts has produced in a half-century. (Sound familiar? Sound like McGonagall's promise to Harry, in front of Umbridge, to help him make Auror if it took the last breath she drew on this earth?) It would explain why McGonagall decided to shower so much extra help and attention on Hermoine -- a theory I prefer to the only other possible reason ESE McGonagall would have latched on to Hermoine to mentor -- as a convert to her own personal ESE coven. Just my thoughts, Bohcoo From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Nov 4 22:01:00 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 22:01:00 -0000 Subject: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84102 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > Remus could have avoided the problem if he'd known what Neville was > going to say, but he didn't. So once he'd asked Neville the > question, he had to go forward with the exercise. Unless you're > suggesting that Remus knew perfectly well what Neville would say and > set him up...I don't believe that myself but all you ESE!Lupin fans > will love it. Jen: Lupin does seem to know a little about Neville's family--he probably thought Gran would be Neville's biggest fear! Lupin thinking Harry would see LV was just a wrong guess, seems the same for Neville. Hermione is the interesting one. Lupin wouldn't know anything about her, being Muggle-born. I guess he could know about the basilisk from Dumbledore. If a boggart/dementor can cause Harry to feel the same as a real dementor, could a boggart/basilisk actually petrify or kill someone? If so, then they wouldn't let Hermione face a boggart in her end-of-term exam (where she *said* she saw McGonagall telling her she failed--I don't buy that!). From mbush at lainc.com Tue Nov 4 22:06:49 2003 From: mbush at lainc.com (mtwelovett) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 22:06:49 -0000 Subject: Prefect Privileges/Powers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84103 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermowninny719" > wrote: > > > > ...edited... > > > > My question is...What privileges/powers do the prefects have with > > regard to disciplining other students? > > > > ...edited... > > > > While re-reading COS (again!) I noticed that Percy took 5 points > > from Griffindor when he caught Ron in the Moaning Myrtle's bathroom. > > (COS pg 157-158 approx). > > > > Do these two events conflict, or is there some way both could be > > true? > > > > > > > > Just a thought... > > Hermowninny > > >--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: bboy_mn: > > Percy taking points off would very much seem to conflict with the most > recent book (OoP), however, we only know that Percy SAID he was taking > points off. We don't know that the points were actually lost. > > Remember, this occurred during Harry's second year at Hogwarts, and > Percy may have been banking on the fact that Harry and Ron didn't > completely understand the rules of the Prefect system. > > From the latest book it would seem that Percy's only real option was > to give Harry and Ron detention, and given how the rest of the school > felt about Harry at the time, he may not have had the heart to do > that. So, just to scare them, he may have threatened them with the > loss of house points. > > Just a thought. Mtwelovett: Another option for this to work, would be that since the "model" we have for the Prefects at Hogwarts is Percy, that once you become a perfect you remain a Prefect. Maybe the 5th year prefects have certain "powers" then in 6th year, other "powers" are added, and more still in 7th year. In Cos Percy would have been a 6th year prefect, and in OOP Malfoy was only in 5th year, maybe as a prefect you can't take house points until your 6th and 7th year. Just another thought Mtwelovett From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 4 22:24:05 2003 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:24:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prefect Privileges/Powers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031104222405.21616.qmail@web20011.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84104 > > bboy_mn: > Remember, this occurred during Harry's second year > at Hogwarts, and > Percy may have been banking on the fact that Harry > and Ron didn't > completely understand the rules of the Prefect > system. That doesn't really work for me. Why would Percy think that after over a year of being at Hogwarts Ron and Harry wouldn't know who could punish them and how? Seems like only you could only bank on ignorance with first years. (and even then really only the muggle-borns because a sibling or parent could easily tell the child how the place worked - still can't believe no one told Ron about the hat; Fred and George must have told him when no one was around and Ron didn't mention it to anyone) Rebecca ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From kkearney at students.miami.edu Tue Nov 4 22:30:11 2003 From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 22:30:11 -0000 Subject: Hermione's fear (WAS Lupin's sense of humor ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84105 Jen wrote: > Hermione is the interesting one. Lupin wouldn't know anything about > her, being Muggle-born. I guess he could know about the basilisk > from Dumbledore. If a boggart/dementor can cause Harry to feel the > same as a real dementor, could a boggart/basilisk actually petrify > or kill someone? If so, then they wouldn't let Hermione face a > boggart in her end-of-term exam (where she *said* she saw McGonagall > telling her she failed--I don't buy that!). Why not, out of curiosity? Hermione fears failure. A boggart obviously can't appear as such an abstract concept, so he takes the most current form of it, i.e. failure of the current task, her exams. I don't have any problem believing that to be Hermione's worst fear. If a person begins to be identified by success, as Hermione is, both by herself and by others, then failing to live up to expectations (either her own or others') can be devastating. -Corinth From sydenmill at msn.com Tue Nov 4 22:44:51 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 22:44:51 -0000 Subject: Hermione's boggart In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84106 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Anne Geldermann" wrote in post #84090: > It is pretty reasonable for Lupin to guess that Hermione's boggart > could be a basilisk. To most minds, a basilisk and the risk of > death is much more likely to be terrifying than being told you've > failed all your classes. Bohcoo responds: SS, ch. 9, page 162, American edition. Hermoine speaking to Ron and Harry after their narrow escape from the jaws of Fluffy: "'I hope you're pleased with yourselves. We could all have been killed -- or worse, expelled. Now, if you don't mind, I'm going to bed.'" :D Bohcoo From sydenmill at msn.com Tue Nov 4 22:34:25 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 22:34:25 -0000 Subject: Harry's Evolution, WAS: Re: The Black Dog In-Reply-To: <1067948810.3fa79b0a64b87@imap.flinders.edu.au> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84107 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Richard Parker wrote in post #84072: > He will grow from his experiences, but how long > it will take for him to move on from such tragedy is anyones guess. > I just don't think it is realistic to expect a bright and bubbly > harry next year. Bohcoo comments: You are right in your assessment that Harry is not going to ever again be the innocent boy-man he has been throughout the series so far. But, I think he has already decided to move on from his tragedies: OOP, ch. 38, page 870, American Edition: "... He somehow could not find the words to tell them what it meant to him, to see them all ranged there, on his side. Instead he smiled, raised a hand in farewell, turned around, and led the way out of the station toward the sunlit street, with Uncle Vernon, Aunt Petunia and Dudley hurrying along in his wake." There are two very significant things in this last paragraph of Book 5: Up until now, Harry has always walked behind the Dursleys as they leave the station. Not this time. This time, Harry leads. And, they walked toward "the sunlit" street. That signifies hope, optimism, strength and better tomorrows, don't you think? Warm regards, Bohcoo From drednort at alphalink.com.au Tue Nov 4 23:37:36 2003 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 23:37:36 -0000 Subject: Prefect Privileges/Powers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84108 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > bboy_mn: > > From the latest book it would seem that Percy's only real option was > to give Harry and Ron detention, and given how the rest of the school > felt about Harry at the time, he may not have had the heart to do > that. So, just to scare them, he may have threatened them with the > loss of house points. I can't see it - because Percy seems to me smart enough to understand how much this could backfire. He'd know that if he was ever caught imposing a punishment he couldn't deliver on, his authority would be *gone* - once somebody realises you don't have the powers you claim, you can never use them again, so this would be an incredible risk. And Percy doesn't seem to me to be the type of person to put his authority at risk. There's also the factor that I don't think many kids in a boarding school like Hogwarts would be unaware of the intricacies of the disciplinary system by their second year. It'd *really* surprise me if they didn't know precisely where the limits on a prefect's authority lie. From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au Tue Nov 4 23:46:38 2003 From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 09:46:38 +1000 Subject: OT: The Burrow - NOTE TO GROUP References: Message-ID: <00de01c3a32e$50343e10$63984cca@Monteith> No: HPFGUIDX 84109 > > So, if you are posting a web link that is longer than the rigth > margin, remember to UNcheck the '[]Wrap Message Text' box before you > SEND the message. > > If you are using an email program, you will also have the option > somewhere in the program to tell the it not to wrap long lines. > > Just a thought. > > bboy_mn Alternatively, use http://tinyurl.com/ . Here's their blurb. >>Are you sick of posting URLs in emails only to have it break when sent causing the recipient to have to cut and paste it back together? Then you've come to the right place. By entering in a URL in the text field below, we will create a tiny URL that will not break in email postings and never expires.<< Someone posted it on OTChatter (sorry, can't remember who - apologies!), and I have found it very helpful and easy to use. Nox From Zarleycat at aol.com Tue Nov 4 23:58:05 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 23:58:05 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups]Sirius quite capable was: Re: Dumbledore, Leader of Men (and Women) (was: Chapter Discussions: Chapter 4) In-Reply-To: <02C60499.5EBB4846.FB552779@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84110 Laura wrote: > > > I don't know where you get the idea that Sirius is incapable of > > working with other people. Canon doesn't support it-he works just > > fine with everyone else in the Order except Snape. Molly's > > parenting experience isn't relevant-she shouldn't be the one making > > the decision. Do the wishes of Harry's parents count for > > nothing? Tonks replied: > I wholeheartedly agree with you. Just because canon has not revealed that Sirius has any experince with children does not mean that it is fact. James and Lily, from what I take from the books, were fairly level headed. Albeit, James and Sirius's bond was formed very young; however, I highly doubt that either James or Lily would have chosen Sirius to be Harry's Godfather were he not completely capable of the job. At the time of Sirius's appointment to the post of Godfather, it would appear that Lily and James knew their lives were in danager. They thrice thwarted Voldy. I would assume, as Harry has managed to do this four times, that it took a period of time for this to happen. > > For a long time, there has been a lot of Sirius bashing here and in other forums and discussions of the book. I realise that it may seem as though Sirius may not have been up to the task of caring for Harry given his situation, but I stand firm in the thought that James and Lily would NOT have asked him to be such an important role in Baby Harry's life when the *knew* their time may be short were it not that Sirius was quite capable of the job. > > I think people are looking at Sirius from the 'now perspective' versus the 'then'. Sirius had not seen Harry since the night Lily and James died. He had not seen Harry blossom from a baby to a young man. He was obviously shocked by Harry's likeness to his father, not only in looks, but in all areas. People seem to forget that Sirius, although sometimes his actions imperfect, had been taken from Harry's life when he, too, was still young-- at least in Wizard terms- at that same time, he had also lost his best mate and most trusted friend. So, Sirius returning to see Harry, a vision of young James, may have clouded his judgements a little. > I wonder if part of the reason that Molly thinks that Sirius confuses Harry with James might not have something to do with how Sirius is trying to relate to teenaged Harry. Sirius wasn't there to raise Harry and see him grow up as his own person. Instead, since they're connecting at a much later age, perhaps Sirius draws from his experiences with teenage James, whether consciously or not, because that seems like a logical frame-of-reference to him. And, since in some ways Harry is like James, that image is reinforced for Sirius. When Harry doesn't act like James, Sirius feels a certain dissonance. I think this relationship had a boat-load of interesting directions to which it could have sailed. Unfortunately, JKR had other ideas. Marianne From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 5 00:10:42 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 00:10:42 -0000 Subject: Hermione's boggart (Was: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84111 > Annemehr: > Hermione's boggart was never a basilisk. What Pippin is referring to is that Hermione never faced the boggart in Lupin's first lesson. Perhaps Lupin didn't want her to because he was afraid it would turn into a basilisk for her (as she was petrified by one only a few months before), and he thought that would frighten the class to much. If this is indeed the reason, then Lupin guessed wrong about both Hermione's and Harry's boggarts -- hey, Pippin, can you turn that into > something evil? > > Or --- if a boggart!dementor makes Harry hear his Mum's murder, whatwould a boggart!basilisk do? > Er, not evil, no. But then, as JKR makes explicit in OOP, being a competent teacher does not preclude having Voldemort growing out of the back of your head. What it does point out is that Lupin *is* a competent teacher. Unlike Hagrid, who doesn't anticipate what will happen if some bratty kid ticks off a hippogriff, Lupin has considered the potential dangers in having his students confront a boggart. Lupin asks Neville what his worst fear is, which he doesn't do for the other students. I think Lupin is likely to know which of his students are magically powerful (Neville is, though his powers aren't under control) and may have vivid memories of terrifying encounters (we still don't know if Neville witnessed the attack on his family.) It's just speculation, but I think the power of the victim may have something to do with the strength of the apparition produced by the boggart, so that Lupin would have reason to be extra cautious in dealing with Harry, Neville and Hermione. The argument that once Neville had named Snape as his worst fear Lupin was obliged to use Snape for the demonstration is weaker now that we've seen Molly's boggart take several terrifying forms in succession. Neville himself anticipates being asked to conjure something else as his worst fear, "I don't want the boggart to turn into her either." Pippin From Zarleycat at aol.com Wed Nov 5 00:12:58 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 00:12:58 -0000 Subject: Harry's Evolution, WAS: Re: The Black Dog In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84112 Richard Parker : > > > He will grow from his experiences, but how long > > it will take for him to move on from such tragedy is anyones guess. > > I just don't think it is realistic to expect a bright and bubbly > > harry next year. > > > Bohcoo comments: > > You are right in your assessment that Harry is not going to ever > again be the innocent boy-man he has been throughout the series so > far. But, I think he has already decided to move on from his > tragedies: > > OOP, ch. 38, page 870, American Edition: > "... He somehow could not find the words to tell them what it meant > to him, to see them all ranged there, on his side. Instead he > smiled, raised a hand in farewell, turned around, and led the way out > of the station toward the sunlit street, with Uncle Vernon, Aunt > Petunia and Dudley hurrying along in his wake." > > There are two very significant things in this last paragraph of Book > 5: Up until now, Harry has always walked behind the Dursleys as they > leave the station. Not this time. This time, Harry leads. > > And, they walked toward "the sunlit" street. That signifies hope, > optimism, strength and better tomorrows, don't you think? Me: That "sunlit street" bit was something I overlooked. Certainly a ray of sunshine after all of the dark, gloom and claustrophobia of OoP might very well be a signal. But, I think the events of this past year have to have a lingering effect on Harry. People don't necessarily move from one stage of grief to the next without some occasional backsliding. (I speak from experience - my mom died when I was 13, and it took a long time to adjust and move forward). And, this doesn't mean that I think Harry will sink into a depression or weep, wail and rend his garments in raging torrents of despair. But, I will find it very odd? questionsable? unusual? unreal? if he simply soldiers stoically onward, shrugging off these events like an old coat. Marianne From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Nov 5 00:35:19 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 00:35:19 -0000 Subject: Hermione's fear (WAS Lupin's sense of humor ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84113 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" wrote: > Jen wrote: > >If so, then they wouldn't let Hermione face a > > boggart in her end-of-term exam (where she *said* she saw > McGonagall > > telling her she failed--I don't buy that!). > Cornith: > Why not, out of curiosity? Hermione fears failure. A boggart > obviously can't appear as such an abstract concept, so he takes the > most current form of it, i.e. failure of the current task, her exams. > > I don't have any problem believing that to be Hermione's worst fear. > If a person begins to be identified by success, as Hermione is, both > by herself and by others, then failing to live up to expectations > (either her own or others') can be devastating. Jen: Logically, I have no reason to doubt Hermione would be most afraid of failure. We even have canon from PS/SS, something Bohcoo quotes in this thread, when Hermione says being expelled is worse than being killed. It's just...why do we never see her facing off against a boggart? That's what bothers me. She doesn't get a chance in class, and her other experience with the boggart is hidden. Why would JKR do that? Yes, it's from Harry's POV so we don't see Hermione in the trunk doing her exam...it just seems secretive to me. Also, even if McGonagall is who Hermione really saw, it seems extreme that she "burst out again, screaming" (POA, US, cahp. 16, p. 319) and was difficult to calm down. Maybe JKR was taking a poke at herself since she identifies with the Hermione character--how deep the fear of failure runs in certain high-achieving people. Another thing that bothers me: Hermione isn't the same girl in POA as she was in in PS/SS. Grades and success are crucially important, but they aren't the only thing she lives for anymore. In fact, here's a qoute to support that: "Books! And cleverness! There are more important things--friendship and bravery and--oh Harry--be careful!" (SS, chap. 16, p. 287). Jen, off to find the most recent thread on this subject from a month or two ago.... From siriuslove71 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 03:06:02 2003 From: siriuslove71 at yahoo.com (Diana_Sirius_fan) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 03:06:02 -0000 Subject: Knockturn Alley Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84114 COS Page: 55 "Where did you come out?" Ron asked. "Knockturn Alley," said Hagrid grimly. "Excellent" said Fred and George together. "We've never been allowed in." said Ron enviously. "I should ruddy well think not," growled Hagrid. I read this paragraph over and over and it hit me as kind of strange. I'm thinking about the "we've never been allowed in" part. Yes, it could be Mrs. Weasley not allowing them to go there, but the way it is phrased sounds more like the grate isn't allowing them in. It wouldn't suprise me if Fred and George have tried to get in. If it is the grate that doesn't allow them in (maybe because they are young, underage wizards) then why would it allow Harry in? I may be over analyzing this but it just seemed strange to me. It seems as if it was Mrs. Weasley not allowing them in they would of said something like, "Mum won't allow us to go." Am I just crazy? What do you guys think? Thanks, Diana From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 03:37:41 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 03:37:41 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84115 > << Tom had gone to the trouble to find out about his family (even only > with revenge in mind perhaps), then I would have thought that he > would have covered this angle. Surely you're not expecting Voldemort to produce a marriage certificate from his back pocket?>>> > > The Sergeant Majorette says > > But why are we taking Tom's word for anything? The child's not right, as the old folks say. I think he constructed an elaborate fantasy from a few scraps of evidence. If there *was* a marriage certificate and his mother *was* an abandoned wife, why not just show up with a lawyer and a tabloid reporter? Why not just show up with a tabloid reporter??? Hello! We happen to be talking about the most evil dark wizard in a hundred years. When Voldemort wants revenge, he wants REVENGE. Humiliating his father wasn't going to do it for him. And also, have you forgotten that the wizarding world doesn't want muggles to know about the existence of witches and wizards? Exposure is never an option for Riddle. As for taking Tom's word on it, don't forget he had to track his father down in order to murder him. I would assume he did that by either looking up his mother's marriage certificate or his own birth certificate, which would probably have told him they were married. Sergeant Majorette: > Tom Riddle cannot possibly have been the only kid stuck in an > orphanage because his/her father abandoned his mother when he found > out she was a witch/pregnant/the wrong religion/underage/other/all of the above, and *they* didn't turn out to be psychotic evil dark > lords/ladies. You are correct in saying that he isn't the only kid ever whose mother has been abandoned by his father. But how many of those mothers actually die as a direct result of abandonment? Not too many, I would think. And when you add in that abandonment was a lot less common back then, probably it was pretty rare for a kid to end up in an orphange *just* because his mother had been abandoned. And when you add in that he was a magic kid, heir of Slytherin, and being sorted to Slytherin House, the house that has turned out more dark wizards than any other, I don't think it's so surprising he turned out evil. Erin From happydogue at aol.com Wed Nov 5 03:37:35 2003 From: happydogue at aol.com (happydogue at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 22:37:35 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Knockturn Alley Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84116 Couldn't it be simple enough that he mispronounced the name "D-Dia-gon Alley" compared with Fred's "Diagon Alley," and combined with his inexperience with floo travel ended up close to his destination but not quite there. Mrs. Weasley did tell him "...You must speak clearly, dear." JMM From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 5 03:41:35 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 03:41:35 -0000 Subject: Hagrid as "giant" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84117 As so many posts here begin, I'll begin this one: It's probably been discussed before, but.... Sometimes I can be so dense...or at least it can take so long before I notice something blatant that JKR says. I mean, on the 4th re- read of SS, I finally am struck by something. In GoF when it is discovered *for certain* that Hagrid is half-giant, I don't think I'm wrong in saying that there was an element of surprise in this news for at least Harry & Ron, possibly Hermione? (*Am* I wrong in this?) Yet, clearly, JKR has let *us readers* in on the likelihood of this from the very beginning. Page 47 of the US hardback edition of SS includes JKR referring to Hagrid as "the giant" FIVE TIMES. Why did this never register, I wonder, as an "admission" from JKR as to Hagrid's heritage? I realize this isn't earth-shattering, but it certainly does give support to the idea that there are probably quite a lot of "right out there" statements that...well...SOME of us are missing anyway! Siriusly Snapey Susan (and if you're rolling your eyes, saying, "Well, duh!" please don't share that with me just now) From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Wed Nov 5 04:33:13 2003 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 04:33:13 -0000 Subject: Hagrid as "giant" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84118 --- "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: (SNIPPED) > I can take so long before I notice something blatant that JKR > says. I mean, on the 4th re-read of SS, I finally am struck > by something. In GoF when it is discovered *for certain* that > Hagrid is half-giant, I don't think I'm wrong in saying that > there was an element of surprise in this news for at least Harry > & Ron, possibly Hermione? (*Am* I wrong in this?) Yet, clearly, > JKR has let *us readers* in on the likelihood of this from the > very beginning. Page 47 of the US hardback edition of SS includes > JKR referring to Hagrid as "the giant" FIVE TIMES. Why did this > never register, I wonder, as an "admission" from JKR as > to Hagrid's heritage? > > I realize this isn't earth-shattering, but it certainly does give > support to the idea that there are probably quite a lot of "right > out there" statements that...well...SOME of us are missing anyway! > > Siriusly Snapey Susan In Australia, "Bears" are toy on beds or at least cute harmless things. IN US, there are better understandings of the danger and savageness of those wild beasts. Harry had the naive view of giants while Ron was shocked because of the better informed and gruesome knowledge he had of GIANTS. Even Rita Skitter thought it was ground breaking news. So now we can read between the lines more when we hear Umbridge was TOAD like (animagi gone wrong?); hunking Goyle may be part Gargoyle; Mrs Norris may be more than a smart alley cat; etc From ambiree at students.bradley.edu Wed Nov 5 04:36:40 2003 From: ambiree at students.bradley.edu (ambiree at students.bradley.edu) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 22:36:40 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's fear In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1068007000.3fa87e584db69@webmail.bradley.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 84119 > > Jen: > > Lupin does seem to know a little about Neville's family--he probably > thought Gran would be Neville's biggest fear! Lupin thinking Harry > would see LV was just a wrong guess, seems the same for Neville. > > Hermione is the interesting one. Lupin wouldn't know anything about > her, being Muggle-born. I guess he could know about the basilisk > from Dumbledore. If a boggart/dementor can cause Harry to feel the > same as a real dementor, could a boggart/basilisk actually petrify > or kill someone? If so, then they wouldn't let Hermione face a > boggart in her end-of-term exam (where she *said* she saw McGonagall > telling her she failed--I don't buy that!). > > My turn: Perhaps the reason Lupin doesn't let her try the boggart is because he was the bookish one of the Marauders and identifies with Hermione. Think about it, Hermione was disappointed when Harry managed to answer Lupin's questions about the boggart without her help. Perhaps, Lupin suspected that failure was Hermione's fear and wanted to save her from being laughed at for her boggart, as happens in the exams. or could be that Lupin wanted an excuse to not have Harry try the boggart, and so Hermione's chance to tackle the boggart was sacrificed for the common good in case Harry HAD seen Voldemort as his biggest fear. -- Amber ***"The GWE has Spoken."--The GWE*** From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Wed Nov 5 04:40:29 2003 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 04:40:29 -0000 Subject: Alchemy, again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84120 --- "smaragdina5" wrote: > It looks like John Granger, author of _The Hidden Key to Harry > Potter_ and online teacher of a Harry Potter course, has a new > article out: The Alchemist's Tale: Harry Potter & the Alchemical > Tradition in English Literature > > I should really be analyzing or theorizing here, but don't have the > chance to finish it till later so wanted to put the word out. > Happy thinking...> > > smaragdina5 Thanks for that ... I am revisiting Nicholas Flamel and taking my time with it. I'll also need to take my time on this one. ~aussie~ From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 05:36:22 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 05:36:22 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited (WAS: Who Will Betray the Order? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84121 "bohcoo" wrote: > "erinellii" > wrote in post #83919: > > > A forlorn shout echoes across Theory Bay, "Elkins! Elkins! Are you here? Elkins! They've forgotten EverSoEvil!McGonagall!" > Bohcoo comments: > This completely intrigued me, so I went back and read Elkins's > staggeringly insightful post #39470 and the threads it spawned. (And, hat-tip to Erin here, no slouch yourself!) Erin now: Hey, thanks! But I notice I wasn't quite good enough to convince you McGonagall ISN'T evil :-) Did you see Debbie's post, the one I was responding to? Bohcoo: > Okay, so I'm convinced: Minerva is evil to the core. She is the > spurned lover of Voldemort (or, as she was first to call him, Lord > Thingy. . .):) and inside the bun she always wears is a single lock > of his hair that she lovingly cut from his head when he still had > hair instead of scales. > Unfortunately, poor Minerva has no idea the new form her precious > Tommy has assumed.... Erin now: So THAT'S what the bun is for! I always wondered :-) But seriously, which piece of evidence most convinced you of Evil!McGonagall's existance? And what do you think of the glaring flaw in the theory? Namely, if McGonagall is ESE, why *does* Voldemort need to recruit Crouch Jr. to go to Hogwarts as his faithful servant in book 4? Why can't he just tell ESE!McGonagall to turn the cup into a portkey? I've never heard a good explanation for this, and would be interested in how you think around it. Bohcoo: > And another mystery: Why did she latch onto Hermoine to mentor? Erin now: Well if, like me, you don't see McGonagall as ESE, this is easy. McGonagall is head of Gryffindor House and a woman who values excellence, and Hermione is the top-performing student in Gryffindor, as well as often being described as being very similar to McGonagall. Bohcoo: What would her darling Tom Riddle think of her selection of a student who is 100% Muggle? Why would McGonagall mentor such a student UNLESS > > (insert organ music here. . .) > > she was so hurt by Tom Riddle ditching her way back then that she > rushed her loyalties over to Dumbledore in a fit of blind revenge -- > and -- wants to hurt him back by taking a student who embodies > everything he loathes and making her into the best witch Hogwarts has produced in a half-century. Erin: But wait a minute! The McGonagall you've just described *isn't* ESE. You just said you think she's gone back to Dumbledore in a effort to hurt Voldemort. Which means she isn't working for Voldemort. She's not a Death Eater. She's not ESE. She is, in fact, actively working against him, doing things she knows he would hate? Sounds like she's one of the good guys to me, no matter what her supposed motivations for the switch. In fact, this is very close to what I believe *might* be true about McGonagall. It's not a ship I'd be entirely willing to crew (too leaky) but wouldn't it be fun if... Well, suppose there was indeed a relationship between McGonagall and Voldy. Not an Evil!McGonagall, but a McGonagall who was taken in by Riddle's good looks and charm. And, because this is a book for children, Rowling is NOT going to come right out and say that they were "lovers". That's never gonna happen. No she will either have to say that they had "dated" (which, IMO, would not convey the seriousness of the relationship properly) OR that they were... married. That's right, I think it possible that McGonagall was married to Voldemort, and furthermore, that she still is. Picture it... Riddle reveals his evil overlord plans to his young and innocent bride, she is horrified, tells him to "get out" and he does. In fact, he leaves that very day to go on his journey around the world, learning more and more secrets of the dark arts. McGonagall wants to divorce him, but is unable to find him (and anyway, divorce is not *done* nearly so often in those days), so she goes back to her maiden name and tries to forget him. She pours herself into her teaching. When Voldy does surface again, he has a new name and is unrecognizably altered in appearence. He doesn't contact McGonagall, and she has no idea who he is. By the time she realizes Voldemort and her husband are one and the same, he is already Public Enemy #1, and she is terrified to reveal her connection to him. This also explains why so few people know who Voldemort once was. Dumbledore figured it out, and he is protecting Minerva by keeping silent. So... whadd'ya think? Erin From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 03:54:38 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 03:54:38 -0000 Subject: Knockturn Alley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84122 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Diana_Sirius_fan" wrote: Diana wrote: > COS Page: 55 > > "Where did you come out?" Ron asked. > "Knockturn Alley," said Hagrid grimly. > "Excellent" said Fred and George together. > "We've never been allowed in." said Ron enviously. > "I should ruddy well think not," growled Hagrid. > > I read this paragraph over and over and it hit me as kind of > strange. I'm thinking about the "we've never been allowed in" part. > Yes, it could be Mrs. Weasley not allowing them to go there, but the > way it is phrased sounds more like the grate isn't allowing them in. > Now me: I'm sure it had to be more than a simple instruction from Molly that they weren't allowed to enter. Can you see Fred and George standing at the entrance, wanting to go in, then saying, "Mum said we're not allowed, so we'd better not." I just can't see that happening. Although when Harry andHagrid exit Knockturn Alley, it doesn't mention any type of gateway. They come around a corner of the twisting alley and see Gringotts Bank. There doesn't appear to be anything in between them and Diagon Alley. Hermowninny Thought I had something to say, but it turns out I have no answers. From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 5 04:25:45 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2003 23:25:45 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Knockturn Alley Message-ID: <97.4031ea9d.2cd9d5c9@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84123 Hello siriuslove71 at yahoo.com (Diana_Sirius_fan), In reference to your comment: ? . It seems as if it was Mrs. Weasley not allowing ? them in they would of said something like, "Mum won't ? allow us to go." Am I just crazy? What do you guys ? think? Interesting point. I always just assumed it *was* a Weasley rule that the children not go to Knockturn Alley. I can almost see this idea as plausible. Knowing that the darkest of witches and wizards frequent Knockturn Alley, perhaps there could be a protection on the grate. It would certainly explain why our two mischief makers have never been there because if there is anything that F&G love it's breaking rules. But, I think that JKR would have made mention of it in canon. Unless, this is one of those seemingly unimportant important mentions she likes to make. Nice idea. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 5 06:44:26 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 06:44:26 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84124 << wrote:...Why not just show up with a tabloid reporter??? Hello! We happen to be talking about the most evil dark wizard in a hundred years. When Voldemort wants revenge, he wants REVENGE. Humiliating his father wasn't going to do it for him....You are correct in saying that he isn't the only kid ever whose mother has been abandoned by his father. But how many of those mothers actually die as a direct result of abandonment?...And when you add in that abandonment was a lot less common back then, probably it was pretty rare for a kid to end up in an orphange *just* because his mother had been abandoned...>>> The Sergeant Majorette says He wasn't the most evil dark wizard in a hundred years when he killed his father and grandparents. He was a teenager with a screw loose, or he could have simply taken the Riddles for every penny they had and left them destitute and suffering. And did his mother die as a direct result of abandonment? "My mother died just after I was born, sir. They told me at the orphanage she lived just long enough to name me..." Okay, septic shock, but a broken heart? We don't buy it in the ballet Giselle and we don't buy it in a witch with the blood of the great Salazar Slytherin. And was abandonment *less* or *more* common back then? I'd be willing to bet that orphanage placement was standard procedure for the children of abandoned wives, wayward girls and other fallen women. Tom Riddle is *insane*. And the Quibbler is a tabloid... --JDR From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 07:42:48 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 07:42:48 -0000 Subject: Prefect Privileges/Powers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84125 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > bboy_mn: > > > > From the latest book it would seem that Percy's only real option > > was to give Harry and Ron detention, and given how the rest of the > > school felt about Harry at the time, he may not have had the heart > > to do that. So, just to scare them, he may have threatened them > > with the loss of house points. > Shaun: > > I can't see it - because Percy seems to me smart enough to > understand how much this could backfire. ...edited... > > There's also the factor that I don't think many kids in a boarding > school like Hogwarts would be unaware of the intricacies of the > disciplinary system by their second year. ...edited... bboy_mn (who vigorously raises the white flag): I was trying to point out, as usual, that there are likely explainations for seeming inconsistencies. When ever we find any seeming inconsistancy, I find it better to look for an explainations that is likely even if I have to make one up that is unsupported, rather than look for proof that it is a mistake. I still stand by my idea as a possibility, but I think your idea that house points can only be taken from the house in which the Prefect is a member as the MOST LIKELY explaination, and if I had remembered it from when you've brought it up in the past, it probably would have been the one that I too mentioned. So, I humbly bow to the superior knowledge of an actual Prefect. bboy_mn From hieya at hotmail.com Wed Nov 5 07:50:28 2003 From: hieya at hotmail.com (greatlit2003) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 07:50:28 -0000 Subject: Why Dumbledore is at Hogwarts (was Wizard government) In-Reply-To: <002f01c3a141$23c40160$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84126 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb" wrote: > It's interesting that Dumbledore never wanted the MoM job, where he would have been able to institute reform from the inside. Perhaps JKR believes that governments are inevitably corrupt, and that true reform can only come from the outside. > I think that DD stays on at Hogwarts because his priority is to ensure the welfare of students. Voldemort would take over the school if DD was not present, and he would turn it into a school for the Dark Arts-A Death Eater training ground. I noticed that most of the Death Eaters that we have met thus far were fairly young when they joined Voldemort. Snape is currently in his mid to late 30s. He would have been in his early twenties (or perhaps in his late teens) when he and his friends joined Voldemort. Lucius Malfoy was 41 (according to the Daily Prophet) in OOP, which means that he too joined at a young age (recall that Voldemort had been steadily recruiting support for eleven years). Barty Crouch Jr. was only 19 when he was sent to Azkaban. It might be said that DEs are young because most die young, but I don't think that is always the case. Some of them (like the Lestranges) are hardy, and have survived long years under conditions to which death might be preferable. It is interesting to note that the members of the Order are not in a specific age group. If Moody could live so long, why can't DEs? I think that most older wizards and witches were unwilling to make the sort of sacrifices needed to join Voldemort, even if they accepted his ideas (i.e. Sirius's parents). And Voldemort knew this, so he didn't approach them. So instead, he asked the young and guillable. Dumbledore doesn't want Hogwarts to become Voldemort's feeding ground, so he's decided to stay on as the Head. Thanks for reading all that! :) greatlit2003 who wonders what Dumbledore's childhood was like From drednort at alphalink.com.au Wed Nov 5 07:49:01 2003 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 18:49:01 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Prefect Privileges/Powers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FA9461D.5834.6A67DE6@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 84127 On 5 Nov 2003 at 7:42, Steve wrote: > bboy_mn (who vigorously raises the white flag): > > I was trying to point out, as usual, that there are likely > explainations for seeming inconsistencies. When ever we find any > seeming inconsistancy, I find it better to look for an explainations > that is likely even if I have to make one up that is unsupported, > rather than look for proof that it is a mistake. > > I still stand by my idea as a possibility, but I think your idea that > house points can only be taken from the house in which the Prefect is > a member as the MOST LIKELY explaination, and if I had remembered it > from when you've brought it up in the past, it probably would have > been the one that I too mentioned. > > So, I humbly bow to the superior knowledge of an actual Prefect. Aw, don't do that. Debate is fun (-8 Seriously, you haven't suggested anything that's impossible - it just doesn't *feel* right to me. I'd have to see discussion stifled in anyway. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 08:01:02 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 08:01:02 -0000 Subject: Hermione and a Boggart in a Trunk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84128 On the same subject but a completely new train of thought. I have always has a problem with the Final DADA test by Lupin. Mostly I overlooked it in the interest of keeping the story moving and enjoying the bigger picture. But there is a nagging question for which I have no answer. How could a student and their Boggart possibly fit into a trunk? Unless the British have a completely different idea of what a trunk is. Think about it, when a Boggart is unseen and therefore uninfluenced by the presents of a person, it seems to take some vaporous un-embodied form. Although, the book says no one truly knows what an 'uninfluenced' Boggart looks like, it seem reasonable to assume for the point of discussion that it is formless. That makes it really easy to get the Boggart in the trunk, but how do you squeeze Hermione and Prof. McGonagall into that trunk, and once they are in there, how can there possibly be room to breath much less cast a spell. Plus there is the fear factor of having your worst fear instantly right on top of you. That certainly can't make the taske easy. I could maybe buy it, if it had been a wardrobe, cupboard, or closet, but a trunk? One possible explaination is that the trunk was larger on the inside than on the outside, but it would seem that Harry would have commented on a size discrepancy that glaringly obvious. It seems the likely explaination, but seems unlikely that it would occur without comment. >From the limited information available, it would seem to me that a trunk was entirely unworkable under the circumstance. But on the other hand, it did seem to work. So, I don't know. Just a thought. bboy_mn From slgazit at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 5 08:49:38 2003 From: slgazit at sbcglobal.net (slgazit) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 08:49:38 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84129 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "artcase" wrote: > I agree with Laura's assessment/questioning of JKR's intentions with > Molly. Going out on a limb, perhaps JKR is portraying Molly as > the "mother" she wishes she could have been. What I'm getting at here > is the transition of the author from out of work and poor to the > millions of dollars, nice husband, new child thing she has now. If > that assesment sounds a bit harsh, consider my situation. By my > moniker, some of you may think I'm male. Sorry to disappoint, but I'm > a single USA mom of two. I too am a working single mother of two but I disagree with the above disparagement of Molly's character. She is not overprotective of her children, even if she may not always be ready to admit that they are ready to be up on their own. Her children - and especially Harry - are at a very real risk for their life from an evil wizard and his crew. She is trying to provide them as close to a normal childhood (okay, teenhood) as she can. She was completely right in stopping Sirius from telling Harry everything at the beginning of OoP. Not only was Harry not quite ready for that, but he was a security risk, with Voldemort's ability to invade his mind. And she was extremely wise in getting him and the rest of the kids into the house cleaning (if you can call it that) business. Nothing like hard work and a good social environment to help one relax over their troubles. I also disagree with those calling her "non-working" mother. Raising 7 children is more than a full time job. And let's not forget that before going to Hogwarts her kids were at home full time and were almost certainly homeschooled (as I assume all children born to magical parents are). Kind of hard to go out and work at some obscure MoM position while running a household of 9 with no house elves to do the work for you. So until Ginny went to school, she had to still be a full time mom. After that - who can blame her for taking it a bit easy for a few years. In OoP she has a central role in the order as both responsible for cooking, cleaning, etc. for meetings as well as participating in the order's daily tasks (such as guarding the prophecy). I think Molly is a great female role model alongside many others who have not chosen the traditional role (Minerva McGonagall, Hermione, just to name a few). The key is not whether you get paid for what you do, but how well you do the job you selected - and Molly is certainly top-notch in the profession she chose. Choosing to focus your career on your family is nothing to be ashamed of - and I say this as one who has never been a stay at home mother, but who knows many who are. > Children need to be taught that both men and women need to work hard > to accomplish their goals. And you think Molly does not??? Salit From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 08:52:01 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 08:52:01 -0000 Subject: Knockturn Alley In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84130 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, happydogue at a... wrote: > Couldn't it be simple enough that he mispronounced the name "D-Dia-gon > Alley" compared with Fred's "Diagon Alley," and combined with his > inexperience with floo travel ended up close to his destination but > not quite there. Mrs. Weasley did tell him "...You must speak > clearly, dear." > > JMM bboy_mn: One other important thing that (presumably) Molly said to Harry before he entered the Floo Stream, "But don't panic and get out too early, wait until you see Fred and George." Now we move to Harry's thought just before he exited the Floo Stream, '...--his bacon snadwiches were churning inside him -- he closed his eyes again wishing it would stop, and then --'. Well, then it did stop. Because he was feeling sick and dizzy, Harry mentally asked to exit the Floo Stream, and that is exactly what happened. Presumably, when you are traveling by Floo, it's somewhat like traveling by subway. You travel on until you SEE your stop and then you want to get out. While specifiying your destination does control where you go, just as getting on the right train controls your destination, you must still have some intent or concious effort to exit at your specific stop or fireplace. I will concede that intent doesn't exert absolute control, if you were traveling to a place you had never been before, you wouldn't know what the proper fire grate would look like, nor what the destination room would look like, so to some extent, the orginal intent created when specifying your destination would take precedence. But it seems from the text that immediate personal intent along the way, can effectyour exit point. Magical travel is such a fun subject. Just a thought. bboy_mn From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 4 22:15:17 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 22:15:17 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84131 > << Tom had gone to the trouble to find out about his family (even only > with revenge in mind perhaps), then I would have thought that he > would have covered this angle. Surely you're not expecting Voldemort > to produce a marriage certificate from his back pocket?>>> The Sergeant Majorette says > > But why are we taking Tom's word for anything? The child's not right, > as the old folks say. I think he constructed an elaborate fantasy > from a few scraps of evidence. If there *was* a marriage certificate > and his mother *was* an abandoned wife, why not just show up with a > lawyer and a tabloid reporter? > Geoff again: Why on earth should he? Consider the circumstances in which this remark was made. Tom has just revealed to Harry that he is Lord Voldemort. He could have said no more. But he goes on and I suspect his anger is beginning to come out... "You think I was going to use my filthy Muggle father's name for ever?" OK, you've made your point. But he wants to justify who he is.... "I, in whose veins runs the blood of Salazar Slytherin himself, through my mother's side..." Right, we know who you are now, don't we boys and girls? "I, keep the name of a foul, common Muggle who abandoned me even before I was born, just because he found out his wife was a witch? No, Harry, I fashioned myself a new name, a name I knew wizards everywhere would one day fear to speak..." He didn't have to say the first sentence above. The point about his father being a Muggle had already been made. He could have gone straight on to the last sentence above. If he was lying about his parents being married, why bother to tell Harry when it wasn't his intention that Harry was going to walk out of the Chamber alive? Harry knows no other than what he has been told. Let's also be realistic. You are introduced to someone new and their wife. You say "I'm not sure whether she is your wife. Would you please show me your marriage certificate?" Hmmm. Duck and run quickly! Seriously, Voldemort lies. OK. But he cannot lie all the time about everything. As I said earlier, why should he lie about this information? Why can't we just accept that what he said was correct. Geoff From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 09:18:56 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 09:18:56 -0000 Subject: Sirius quite capable -Harry, James, & Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84132 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" wrote: > Marianne: > > ... Sirius confuses Harry with James might not have something to do > with how Sirius is trying to relate to teenaged Harry. ... perhaps > Sirius draws from his experiences with teenage James, ..., because > that seems like a logical frame-of-reference to him. And, since in > some ways Harry is like James, that image is reinforced for Sirius. > When Harry doesn't act like James, Sirius feels a certain > dissonance. ... > > Marianne bboy_mn: I think you are very much on the right track here. JAMES is the key, he is the foundation of the common bond between Harry and Sirius. To Harry, Sirius is the closest link in this world to his father James, and to Sirius, Harry is the closest living thing to James. Being close to each other is a way for both of them to be closer to James, to have a piece of James in their life. Plus there is a very big 'GUY' factor involved here. As sweet loving and wonderful as Molly is, she's not a guy. She just doesn't understand guy things like Quidditch, standing up for yourself and being a man, and the enchanting Siren's call of adventure and discovery,. You know typical guys stuff. Arthur does understand this to some extent, but not like Sirius does. Arthur is staddled with responsibility and commitment. He no longer has the independant and adventurous spirit of youth. That's something that Sirius still has, and very much understands. There are things that Sirius could have done for Harry and things he could have been for Harry that just do not have any substitute in any other person. I think guys like Arthur and Remus will be very good friends and guides for Harry, but never to the extent that Sirius could. Just before the book came out we were all predicting who would die, and I wrote a long post saying that the one person who would NOT die was Sirius, because Harry needed him too much. He was far to important to Harry to be killed off. That should have been my clue, that he was the one not least likely, but most likely to be killed off. I many prior discussions of who may or may not be die, I said repeatedly we should look for someone who moves to the forground, someone who, in doing so, gains our sympathy, someone who becomes endearing to us, and once we are emotionally hooked this person, BANG, they are cannon fodder. I guess I should have paid more attention to my own posts. Even now I find it hard to believe that Sirius is dead. I do, however, accept that JKR has killed him, and he is dead and gone from this earth for ever. Although, I still hold that he will come back into the story in a significant way, but not in a physical or ghostly way. The reason I find it so hard to believe that he is dead, is that there is nothing and no one left in the story who can ever possible come close to filling that hole and that role in Harry's life. That's a huge irreplacable emptiness. It's going to be a horrible, nearly impossible loss for both Harry and the story to reconcile. Just a thought. bboy_mn From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 5 11:12:35 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:12:35 -0000 Subject: Sirius quite capable -Harry, James, & Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84133 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > The reason I find it so hard to believe that he is dead, is that there > is nothing and no one left in the story who can ever possible come > close to filling that hole and that role in Harry's life. That's a > huge irreplacable emptiness. It's going to be a horrible, nearly > impossible loss for both Harry and the story to reconcile. > > Just a thought. > > bboy_mn Unless, of course, Sirius turns out not to have been the paragon of virtue that many posters see him as. There was a spate of posts a few months back where an awful lot of posters seemed to be suffering from Animagitis - almost every individual in the books was considered as a possible unregistered Animagus by somebody or other. I pointed out at the time that JKR didn't seem to like unregistered Animagi very much. We've been introduced to four and all of them are treated unsympathetically: James - dead and revealed as not so nice after all Peter - a traitor and now Igor to the chief baddy Rita - a gutter journalist, punished by Hermione (JKR's alter ego) Sirius - dead and...is there another shoe to drop? Lots of plot twists in the books to date; I'd not be surprised if Sirius constituted another. His unexpected demise plus Harry's reaction would be a prime counterpoint to startling revelations indicating that he was not what he seemed. Why knock him off in Book 5 of seven? The suggestion that this somehow enhances Harry's passage into emotional maturity is post facto rationalisation IMO. Fans were having great difficulty in coming up with a good plot line justifying it and so descended into pop psychology to find an acceptable reason. But just suppose that there is a plot line to his death and that his disappearance makes Harry safer.... Kneasy Who can hear the screams of outrage already. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 5 11:37:32 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:37:32 -0000 Subject: A loose end or two... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84134 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > > Now me: > Always enjoy your insightful posts Kneasy, and I'm interested on what > gives you then impression that Bellatrix foremost skill is Killing? > > I got the impression that her skills lie in the art of using pain for > both information extraction, and in the forcing of her victims to do > her will. Using the Cruciatus and Imperius Curses are more her 'cup > of tea' than the AK. Of course that's not to say she doesn't use > it. I'm sure she does and very easily, but I don't think she enjoys > it as much as the others. I can see Bella positively rejoicing at > the thought of Frank and Alice still alive and insane after all this > time. > > Mandy. What you say has a lot of truth in it, though I can't recall her expressing satisfaction in the torture of anyone in quite the way she does with the Longbottoms. Could they be a couple deserving special attention? I think of Bella as being like a sadistic cat; prolong the agony yes, but only as a lead-up to the final denoument. She'd probably love it if Frank and Alice continued to suffer, but are they in a state where they can appreciate what's happened to them? Can the Longbottoms be considered as insane? Now there's a point to consider - is memory loss insanity? Is loss of mind a cause of suffering to the poor unfortunate it happens to? Or is it relief? Could Bella be certain the effects would last this long? Or did some-one else promise to sort out the Longbottoms and leave them as an object lesson to others? Lots of questions, few answers. Kneasy From grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 11:42:43 2003 From: grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com (Granny Goodwitch) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 03:42:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) Message-ID: <20031105114243.37005.qmail@web20714.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84135 5November2003 Dan wrote: ...it is evident to me that the relationship between the fictional muggle world (a hyperbolized RW, in a way), the WitchWizard World (a reflection of the RW with magic trappings) and the RW are becoming the real subject of the series... Granny responds: Humm... This sounds a little over-analytical to me. Wouldn't any work of fiction be the author's perception of the relationship between a fictional world and the real world? This is the real beauty and value of fictional literature. A reader enters the authors world and draws parallels in his own. Dan: Potter's anger reflects the anger that an author might feel at the death of the literary reason d'etre of a book?!?! Granny: Sorry, can't agree here. Seems to me that Potter's anger clearly comes from his feelings of being kept in the dark. His anger is clearly within the framework of the story. What would his anger have to do with the literary raison d'etre? Dan: Possibly. But, if I am correct, then what makes Luna different is that she is almost entirely RW - strangely enough a character satisfying certain fan ficcy type impulses, one one hand, but completely modeled, or rather designed, as a real-life, real person. Granny: Luna, RW. OK, I can see your point. There is always a spicy distracted type in every crowd. But the fact that she went through the entire ordeal of battling with the DE's in the Department of Mysteries along with Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny and Neville and was the only one that came out without so much as a scratch is significant in wizarding terms. Granny Goodwitch --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From thomasmwall at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 12:30:58 2003 From: thomasmwall at yahoo.com (Tom Wall) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:30:58 -0000 Subject: Maturity as a theme in OoP and Sirius' future plot relevance (WAS: Sirius quite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84136 Kneasy wrote: [Sirius'] unexpected demise plus Harry's reaction would be a prime counterpoint to startling revelations indicating that he was not what he seemed. Tom: You know, I'd go for this whole idea that Sirius was not what he seemed to be, if only for the fact that it's already been done repeatedly. PoA was all about showing us that Sirius wasn't what he seemed to be, both in regards to the slander regarding the debacle with Pettigrew, and in regards to his Animagical abilities. And in OoP, Hermione quite astutely points out that she thinks it's possible that Sirius is `egging' them on, living vicariously through the Trio. In both cases, the author is encouraging both Harry and the readership to take a look at what might be motivating Sirius, and also in both cases, she's suggesting to us that what might really be motivating him is not what may be evident on the surface. It would seem sort of redundant to do it all over again, don't you think? I mean, the man's dead now. How many times can we possibly flip-flop on his character and still keep it interesting? I'd say that the battery-life concerning serious revelations about Sirius is about run down to nothing, really. Sure, he'll get some future play as a tragic memory in Harry's past, but I think that's about it, honestly. Too much subversion of Sirius' character and it'll start to sound to me like "What do you *mean* there's another unregistered animagus?" ;-) Kneasy: Why knock him off in Book 5 of seven? The suggestion that this somehow enhances Harry's passage into emotional maturity is post facto rationalisation IMO. Fans were having great difficulty in coming up with a good plot line justifying it and so descended into pop psychology to find an acceptable reason. Tom: But Kneasy, that's what this list is all about! Post-facto rationalization is what makes HPfGU go `round, wouldn't you say? I mean, it's what constitutes nearly all of the theoretical endeavors that go on around here. I mean, without post-facto rationalization, what would we have to do, anyways? ;-) For my take, I'm inclined to accept the author's statements on this. She said in that giant-webcast a while back that the death in Book Five was specifically designed to illustrate several points. First off, it was supposed to demonstrate clearly that our characters are now in a wartime situation, which means that one minute you can be talking to your best friend and the next minute that person can be dead as a doornail. Unfortunately, Sirius is not dead as a doornail, but I'm of a mindset that parallels Bboy's: Sirius will not return to the storyline as either alive or as a ghost, but he will continue to be a touch-point for Harry. Secondly, JKR said that the death in OoP was written because of how Harry would take it, because of how it would affect him. Now, this is basically a blatant admission that his death was used to facilitate Harry's overall growth and understanding. But that point aside, it's seems fair to assert that no death could have been as traumatic for Harry as Sirius' - I'd wager that even Dumbledore's death wouldn't have taken him as powerfully. (I am, however, hoping ? or at least, banking - that Albus will kick it in Book Six.) So on this note, I'd say that I certainly believe that Sirius' death will catalyze Harry's growth into maturity. I'm actually surprised that you'd discount the theme of maturity as simply a pop-psychological rationalizing afterthought of the events in the story. It seems to me that maturity ? or at least the growth into maturity - is a theme that the author quite deliberately highlighted in OoP. We see this most concretely in Harry's newfound love life and the inevitable complications which arise from his relationship with Cho. It comes to play in the Order's planning and Harry's desire to "fight." But we are practically bonked off the head with maturity- as-theme when the centaur (Bane, was it?) observes that Harry was nearing manhood, and thus that he was more dubiously a "foal," and that because of this he was possibly exempt from their criteria regarding who is eligible to die and who should be safe. And in the Department of Mysteries, we're treated to the delightfully bizarre metaphor of the Death Eater who is forced to de- mature and mature in cycles: if this isn't harping on the theme of maturity, I don't know what is. ;-) This is, of course, not even the beginning of a scratch on the surface. One could further discuss maturity and its attainment as a theme in OoP through Snape's Worst Memory, the realizations that accompany that in the context of Harry's past and future views of James and Lily, the formation of the DA and the DA's connection to the kids' growing understanding of the peril in the world around them, the limited information that Lupin and Sirius grant to Harry in the beginning of the novel and the fact that this represents his first real inclusion and interaction in the plans and planning of adults. We could go into the very conscious repetition of the concept of "disobeying" one's parents (and that theme's relationship to maturity in the sense of making decisions for oneself) as illustrated not only by Ron and his mother's request to stay out of the DA, but also by the twins' attainment of "Age", Cho, Marietta, and, Whoa! Sirius himself in reference to his parents and his brother Regulus. We could talk maturity concerning Dumbledore's advanced state of it, and how maturity occasionally takes one further away from an understanding of youth, or in the context of "Career Advice" and the idea of self-regulation and a sense of personal direction and responsibility, or of the symbolic nature of naming prefects (students who oversee students in the stead of adults), or we could go into an analysis of OWLS and how they represent a rite of passage for the average youngster in the WW, a rite of passage that, in many ways, determines the future of these young people, nevermind the quite blatantly literalized metaphor that is the "Disillusionment" to which Moody subjects Harry at the story's outset. Disillusionment is, of course, a classic conundrum when it comes the maturation process. Also, in a more peripheral sense, Harry's dealings with the Ministry and St.Mungo's both illustrate to me a conscious effort on the part of JKR to illustrate Harry's increasing involvement in the adult world of the Potterverse, while simultaneously keeping Harry somewhat trapped in the juvenile world of Hogwarts. In a sense, during this book Harry was straddling the two states of being, with the theme heightened by the adult (read: Ministry) interference in a child's world, ala Hogwarts. In a post-OoP sense, I'd say that Harry has definitely had maturity forced upon him to one degree; in another sense, it's been something he's been actively seeking. Now, armed with the information about the prophecy (and possibly his "destiny"), and scarred with the overwhelming weight of the guilt that Sirius' death - at least to some degree - is Harry's own fault ("if he hadn't gone to rescue Sirius, Sirius wouldn't have died") I'd say that post OoP Harry is undeniably a man. A young man, to be sure, but a man nonetheless. Really, when you put it all together, maturity doesn't seem at all like post-facto rationalization, does it? It's quite clearly a major theme in the novel, at least the way that I read it. Oh, and finally on the death: this is something that JKR didn't outright say, but I ardently believe it anyways. Sirius' death was about the last thing I saw coming. Before OoP we had a poll that concerned itself with "Who do you think will de in Book Five?" About three percent of the respondents on that poll thought that Sirius would be the one to go. Sirius' death was about as Bang!y as you could get, given the circumstances and expectations that surrounded OoP's release. Kneasy: But just suppose that there is a plot line to his death and that his disappearance makes Harry safer.... Tom: Well, I *suppose* that she could still take Sirius out for a spin in a later novel, although I don't really see too many revelations on the horizon regarding his character. But as for Harry being safer, and as for that "safer-ness" being connected with Sirius? Well, I dunno. I personally see Harry as prime fodder for a manifold number of unsafe happenings in future novels. If anything, he'll continually become more unsafe, if only because the stakes get higher and higher; JKR has definitely left herself room to maneuver on the Harry-may-eventually-end-up-in-the-bone-garden routine, but I don't see any of that elbow-room on the "Harry is in some ways safer" side of the equation. It seems to me that Harry is, in every way, less safe after OoP. And on that note, Sirius' death concretely and thematically makes Harry *less* safe, since Sirius, from PoA through OoP, was both one of Harry's prime guardians and one of his trusted confidants. So, interesting thoughts; they didn't necessarily make me outraged (I hope that isn't *too* much of a disappointment for you), but they did make me think. ;-) -Tom From sofie_elisabeth at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 5 13:05:26 2003 From: sofie_elisabeth at yahoo.co.uk (Soph) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:05:26 -0000 Subject: Prefect Privileges/Powers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84137 hermowninny719 wrote: > My question is...What privileges/powers do the prefects have with > regard to disciplining other students? > We learned in OOP that Prefects do not have power to add or deduct > house points (OOP pg 625-ish). When Malfoy informs HRH of the > Inquisitorial Squad having this power, Hermione responds that this > will undermine the whole prefect system. I just presumed that what Hermione meant is that prefects can't take points from prefects, I could be wrong of course. ~ Sophie From sydenmill at msn.com Wed Nov 5 13:27:56 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:27:56 -0000 Subject: Magical Travel ( or, Grins for Steve) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84138 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote in message 84130: > Magical travel is such a fun subject. > > Just a thought. > > bboy_mn Bohcoo responds: SS, ch. 6, page 89, American edition. Uncle Vernon speaking to Harry: "'Funny way to get to a wizards' school, the train. Magic carpets all got punctures, have they?'" (Do you know if there is an analysis of all the forms of magical travel and the pluses and minuses of each form of travel?) Thoughts back, Bohcoo :) From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 13:31:04 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 05:31:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Lupin's sense of humor (was:Re: TBAY: Evil! McGonagall Revisited ) Message-ID: <20031105133104.31706.qmail@web40014.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84139 5Nov03 The Sergeant Majorette says: The Lupins of the world are the seeming geeks or nerds that mysteriously never get beaten up, and nobody can figure out why the jocks are leery of him. Paula now: Of course! A guy who can just whip out his chocolate after the fear and dread of Dementors with such cool and aplomb as Lupin did is not to be crossed. Jocks know well that still waters run deep. ~Paula "Griff" Gaon Please vote in the "Which is your favorite creature poll?" http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/polls Thanks to those who've already voted! --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sydenmill at msn.com Wed Nov 5 13:52:43 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 13:52:43 -0000 Subject: Lupin's Chocolate, WAS: Lupin's sense of humor (and a bunch of other stuff) In-Reply-To: <20031105133104.31706.qmail@web40014.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84140 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Paula Gaon wrote in post 84139: > > Paula now: > Of course! A guy who can just whip out his chocolate after the fear and dread of Dementors with such cool and aplomb as Lupin did is not to be crossed. Jocks know well that still waters run deep. > Bohcoo responds: (Agree completely, Paula) Your comments made these thoughts spring to mind: Why does Lupin just happen to have a satchel-full of chocolate with him? Advance warning that dementors might be about on September 1 and might try to hijack the Hogwarts Express? (Wondering how creatures with no more physical substance than vapor, "weightless as dark," "absorbed into the darkness" when attacked by a patronus, could stop a speeding locomotive. Seems they would get their lips ripped off if they attempted a kiss under those circumstances, wouldn't ya think? :D But, I digress. . .) Does Lupin have other Dark Arts remedies and potions in that bag as well? Does the chocolate taste a bit like garlic, perhaps, having shared the same close quarters of his luggage? Is that part of the Dark Arts Professorship, to be prepared for dark creature encounters? (If so, wouldn't that be just too sadly funny, too gut-wrenchingly ironic?) Bohcoo (Fan of and fond of Lupin) From smaragdina5 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 04:00:47 2003 From: smaragdina5 at yahoo.com (smaragdina5) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 04:00:47 -0000 Subject: Alchemy, again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84141 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "smaragdina5" wrote: > It looks like John Granger, author of _The Hidden Key to Harry > Potter_ and online teacher of a Harry Potter course, has a new > article out: The Alchemist's Tale: Harry Potter & the Alchemical > Tradition in English Literature > > http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/issues/16.9docs/16-9pg34.html I;ve since digested the article and if you get a chance to look at this, a lot is eye opening. I'd read his theories before OOP came out, but now there is more data. (Ron and Hermione symbolism is pretty clear... but for those who need more motivation to click on the link, the article even appears to suggest that Kingsley will bite the dust aquatically, and back a Harry/Luna ship upcoming!) smaragdina5 From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 5 07:48:06 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 07:48:06 -0000 Subject: Prefect Privileges/Powers In-Reply-To: <20031104222405.21616.qmail@web20011.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84142 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Rebecca Stephens wrote: Rebecca: > Seems like only you could only bank on ignorance with > first years. (and even then really only the > muggle-borns because a sibling or parent could easily > tell the child how the place worked - still can't > believe no one told Ron about the hat; Fred and George > must have told him when no one was around and Ron > didn't mention it to anyone) > Geoff: You're missing a bit of Fred's mischievious humour..... "Harry swallowed. 'How exactly do they sort us into houses?' he asked Ron. 'Some sort of test, I think. Fred said it hurts a lot but I think he was joking.'" PS p.86 (UK edition) "'So we've just got to try on the hat!' Ron whispered to Harry. 'I'll kill Fred, he was going on about wrestling a troll.'" ditto p.89 One of these rumours and initiation things used by older pupils trying to scare the pants of new pupils. I remember something similar when I went to grammar school at 11. Geoff From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 5 11:49:38 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 11:49:38 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups]The Burrow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84143 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, John and Peg > wrote: > > Does anyone know where The Burrow may be? In book 2 she starts to > touch on it but I still cannot figure that out. > > > > John & Peg > > bboy_mn: > > Well, we don't know for sure because the book doesn't give us enough > information, and JKRowling has only hinted at it's location; she has > never directly confirmed it. The hint was that the name Ottery St > Catchpole was inspired by Ottery St Mary. > > It is beleived to be in Devon which is in the southwest of England. Geoff: I have been mulling over this renewed thread about The Burrow and feel, that there appear to be some anomalies in JKR's description of the place, especially in relation to its location. The favoured position for many people is in the area of Ottery St.Mary. This lies on the river Otter just east of Exeter. The Otter flows into the sea at Budleigh Salterton, 5 miles east of Exmouth. Several names in the area ? Venn Ottery, Otterton and Upottery ? reflect the river connection. Some of you may have picked up from my postings that I now live in West Somerset. From my place to Ottery St.Mary is about 50 miles. By coincidence, three weeks ago, my wife and I were in the Exeter area checking out a possible centre for a Church youth weekend and decided to have a couple of nights down there, staying in Sidmouth and in Exeter respectively. While there, I chanced to drive through Ottery St.Mary and would agree that the country round there could certainly match the description of The Burrow ? mark you, so would a lot of the UK! Now, let's consider some facts. Ottery St.Mary is about 9-10 miles east of Exeter and thus a direct journey to London about 165 miles or so. (Exeter is 173 by rail from Paddington). The first problem is in COS when they get up at cock-crow and dash around before leaving and then find things have been forgotten. "They had almost reached the motorway when Ginny shrieked that she'd left her diary " If they are heading for the motorway, this is probably Junction 29 on the M5 which is 8-9 miles away; a long way to turn back for a diary. But further, what are they doing heading for the M5? Are they planning M5 and then M4 into London which is a long way round and adds about 25 miles to the direct route. Consider the likelihood of rush hour holdups around Bristol which are common and our 11.00 departure looks in danger already. The logical way from the Ottery St.Mary area (and I am continuing to follow the theory that Ottery St.Catchpole is nearby) would be to pick up the A30 near Honiton, then A303/M3 into London. I, although living quite a bit further north, avoid the M5 and use A358/A303/M3 when going into London. Secondly, the Muggle taxis in GOF. It is being suggested that they have ordered these to go from The Burrow to Kings Cross, about 165 miles. To get a taxi from my village into Taunton, which is about 30 miles, recently cost a friend ?42.00 (about USD 60). So three taxis into London from East Devon would be in the stratosphere financially. We know that the Weasleys are far from well-off; Harry is always embarrassed by the fact he has more money and Ron always complains about being poor so who's picking up the tab? Surely not the Ministry - they do not seem to consider Harry under threat as he was in POA. I believe that Jo Rowling had connections with Devon but the various things I have outlined above raise questions in my mind. Possibly they are items in the plot line which haven't been thought through completely as not being vital to the main story line. Finally, and a digression. I wonder whether the definition of "city" in the US and Canada is different to the UK. One poster refers to Sidmouth and Torquay as cities; I'm sure the inhabitants would greatly appreciate that. The only cities in Devon are Exeter and Plymouth - Exeter is considered to be the regional capital of the South-west ? other places would be labelled towns, villages or possibly hamlets. Geoff From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Wed Nov 5 13:38:48 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 07:38:48 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione and a Boggart in a Trunk? References: Message-ID: <003f01c3a3a2$260fb960$5f97aec7@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84144 > bboy_mn: > Although, the book says no one truly knows > what an 'uninfluenced' Boggart looks like, it seem reasonable to > assume for the point of discussion that it is formless. Iggy here: This statement actually brings up another interesting question for me... If it's stated in PoA that nobody truly knows what an 'uninfluenced' boggart looks like, and a boggart needs to be near a person to manifest their fear... How did Moody know it was a boggart when he used his magic eye to look at the one Mrs. Weasley later tried to get rid of if nobody knows what they look like when 'uninfluenced'? (I'm assuming, of course, that a boggart can't manifest a fear when a person looks at it through a series of walls, floors, and the sides of it's hidey-hole...) Iggy McSnurd From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Wed Nov 5 13:43:25 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 07:43:25 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Knockturn Alley References: Message-ID: <004c01c3a3a2$cac45600$5f97aec7@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84145 > bboy_mn: > > Because he was feeling sick and dizzy, Harry mentally asked to exit > the Floo Stream, and that is exactly what happened. Presumably, when > you are traveling by Floo, it's somewhat like traveling by subway. You > travel on until you SEE your stop and then you want to get out. > Iggy here: Could it also be that something about Knockturn Alley keeps Witches and Wizards who don't practice the Dark Arts (or are supposedly "dark creatures" like giants...) out of their section of the Floo Networks and the alley itself? Hagrid could get in because he's half-giant... Harry could get in because he bears some of Lord Voldemort in his being... Iggy McSnurd From liz at studylink.com Wed Nov 5 13:13:22 2003 From: liz at studylink.com (liz) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 14:13:22 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin's Chocolate, WAS: Lupin's sense of humor (and a bunch of other stuff) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84146 on 5/11/03 2:52 pm, bohcoo at sydenmill at msn.com wrote: > Bohcoo responds: > (Agree completely, Paula) > > Your comments made these thoughts spring to mind: Why does Lupin > just happen to have a satchel-full of chocolate with him? Advance > warning that dementors might be about on September 1 and might try to > hijack the Hogwarts Express? Oh yeah. I think Lupin's appointment to the DA post this particular year is definitely calculated by DD. DD wants him at Hogwarts because of any insight he may offer in the Sirius area, and DD wanted him on the Express armed with chocolate and a competent patronus just in case of any trouble with the dementors. Why else is he there? No other teacher ever takes the Express. Also, with regards to Lupin's sense of humour, how about the chewing gum up the nose incident with Peeves?? Priceless! Liz From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Nov 5 15:41:48 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 15:41:48 -0000 Subject: Harry's Evolution, WAS: Re: The Black Dog In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84147 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" wrote: > OOP, ch. 38, page 870, American Edition: > "... He somehow could not find the words to tell them what it meant > to him, to see them all ranged there, on his side. Instead he > smiled, raised a hand in farewell, turned around, and led the way out > of the station toward the sunlit street, with Uncle Vernon, Aunt > Petunia and Dudley hurrying along in his wake." > > There are two very significant things in this last paragraph of Book > 5: Up until now, Harry has always walked behind the Dursleys as they > leave the station. Not this time. This time, Harry leads. > > And, they walked toward "the sunlit" street. That signifies hope, > optimism, strength and better tomorrows, don't you think? Jen: Good image, bohcoo! I didn't catch either of those significant points because I was so happy someone (a whole group, even) finally started taking a proactive interest in Harry's welfare. Before now, everyone has played such a reactive role regarding Harry, even Dumbledore. It seems once the blood protection was in place and Harry at Hogwarts, that's the extent of the proactive planning (well, maybe you could include Occlumency--thanks annemehr for pointing that out off-list ). Ultimately I do think this is Harry's fight, his destiny, and he will have to find the strength within himself to move forward. But from the scene above, at least symbolically, we see everyone is finally on the same page and throwing their support *behind* Harry (the Dursleys only grudgingly, of course!). The other quote near the end of OOTP that inspires hope is this: "And yet sitting here on the edge of the lake, with the terrible weight of grief dragging at him, with the loss of Sirius so raw and fresh inside, he could not muster any great sense of fear. It was sunny and the grounds around him were full of laughing people..." (OOTP, US, chap. 38, p. 856) He's a true Gryffindor, his bravery is immense. Just as Harry could pull the sword out of the hat, I expect he will find the internal resources he needs, enough for himself and everyone else in the WW! Jen, wishing she was half as brave as Harry.... From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 16:17:23 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 16:17:23 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84148 > The Sergeant Majorette says: > > He wasn't the most evil dark wizard in a hundred years when he killed his father and grandparents. Erin: Yes he was. He might not have actually earned public recognition of it at that point, but make no mistake- Tom Riddle has always been, personality-wise, the person he is today. He knew exactly what he meant to become, he had it all planned out. Sergeant Majorette: He was a teenager with a screw loose, or he could have simply taken the Riddles for every penny they had and left them destitute and suffering. Erin: I fail to see exactly how Tom Jr. could have left them destitute. You also mentioned a lawyer in your other post. So are you saying Tom should have sued his father? On what grounds? It isn't actually illegal to abandon your spouse, you know. He could maybe have gotten 18 years of child support and some mental distress, but that's it. And that wouldn't have touched the older generation of Riddles at all. Or maybe you're thinking blackmail. Well, remember, Tom Jr. can't expose Tom Sr. to the muggle world because of the wizarding angle. And, since Tom Sr. is a muggle living in a muggle world, he would be unlikely to care what the WW thinks of him. Sergeant Majorette: > And did his mother die as a direct result of abandonment? "My mother died just after I was born, sir. They told me at the orphanage she lived just long enough to name me..." Okay, septic shock, but a > broken heart? We don't buy it in the ballet Giselle and we don't buy it in a witch with the blood of the great Salazar Slytherin. > > And was abandonment *less* or *more* common back then? I'd be willing to bet that orphanage placement was standard procedure for the children of abandoned wives, wayward girls and other fallen women. Erin: Less, definitely less, because the stigma was greater. Ok, it might have been more common for abandoned mothers to place their babies in orphanages, but overall abandonment was much less. And as for why exactly she died... it almost doesn't matter. What matters to Tom is that it is his father's fault he was placed in the orphanage he hates so much. If his mother had lived and still placed him there, then probably his anger would have encompassed the both of them, and he would have taken revenge on both. > Tom Riddle is *insane*. And the Quibbler is a tabloid... Erin: Insane, huh? So you think that when Harry catches him, they should spare him the Dementor's kiss or AK, and instead give him a nice cozy bed in St. Mungo's? I disagree. The level of planning and organization in Tom's evil empire is evidence of sanity, as is the large number of followers he gained. Just because he doesn't have the same moral standards as you is no reason to label him as "of unsound mind". As for the Quibbler... first, we don't know for sure that it was even around back then. If Luna's dad founded it, it probably wasn't. But a wizarding paper wouldn't have worked regardless. As I pointed out earlier, Tom Sr. was a muggle. He wouldn't have cared what the WW thought of him. And also, have you forgotten Voldemort didn't want his followers to know he was of mixed birth? He was hardly going to broadcast it all over Britain. His father could have been killed to dispose of the evidence as much as for revenge. Erin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 5 17:03:50 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 17:03:50 -0000 Subject: Alchemy, again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84149 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "smaragdina5" wrote: > > It looks like John Granger, author of _The Hidden Key to Harry > > Potter_ and online teacher of a Harry Potter course, has a new > > article out: The Alchemist's Tale: Harry Potter & the Alchemical > > Tradition in English Literature > > > > http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/issues/16.9docs/16-9pg34.html > > I;ve since digested the article and if you get a chance to look at > this, a lot is eye opening. I'd read his theories before OOP came > out, but now there is more data. (Ron and Hermione symbolism is > pretty clear... but for those who need more motivation to click on > the link, the article even appears to suggest that Kingsley will bite > the dust aquatically, and back a Harry/Luna ship upcoming!) NOW ME: I've read this, too, and while I don't buy into it all, it is certainly a fascinating read...particulary, I thought, the "Alchemical Design" section. Personally, I thought Mr. Granger should give more weight to the possibility that the presence of so much alchemical imagery & symbolism & even plot might just be attributable to the two things he himself posited but rejected: 1) "the fertility of Rowling's imagination"; or 2) "the imaginative compost of her reading" I've no idea why I never considered "Rubeus" as "red" before [big "duh!"], but I did find that part of Granger's article plausible [Sirius=black; Albus=white; Rubeus=red]. It's certainly interesting analysis, regardless of how one ultimately comes down on the issue of JKR's being "an alchemical writer in the tradition of the English Greats". Though I must say I'm REALLY holding out hope that Granger is dead wrong about Harry & Luna. Harry belongs with Ginny!! Siriusly Snapey Susan From sylviablundell at aol.com Wed Nov 5 17:13:22 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 17:13:22 -0000 Subject: I know Molly Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84150 Salit has said pretty well everything I was going to say in defence of Molly. Remember Martha and Mary in the New Testament. Martha was cumbered with much serving. She probably wouldn't have been if everyone else had given her a hand. Molly assumes sole responsibility for cleaning up that horrible house (good mothering skills to get the kids involved) while Sirius sits around feeling sorry for himself and the others drift in and out and talk. They would all starve to death if it wasn't for Molly. Give the woman a break Sylvia From watsola79 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 17:41:49 2003 From: watsola79 at yahoo.com (watsola79) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 17:41:49 -0000 Subject: Hermione and a Boggart in a Trunk? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84151 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > On the same subject but a completely new train of thought. I have > always has a problem with the Final DADA test by Lupin. Mostly I > overlooked it in the interest of keeping the story moving and enjoying > the bigger picture. But there is a nagging question for which I have > no answer. > > How could a student and their Boggart possibly fit into a trunk? > Unless the British have a completely different idea of what a trunk > is. Think about it, when a Boggart is unseen and therefore > uninfluenced by the presents of a person, it seems to take some > vaporous un-embodied form. Although, the book says no one truly knows > what an 'uninfluenced' Boggart looks like, it seem reasonable to > assume for the point of discussion that it is formless. > > That makes it really easy to get the Boggart in the trunk, but how do > you squeeze Hermione and Prof. McGonagall into that trunk, and once > they are in there, how can there possibly be room to breath much less > cast a spell. Plus there is the fear factor of having your worst fear > instantly right on top of you. That certainly can't make the taske easy. > > I could maybe buy it, if it had been a wardrobe, cupboard, or closet, > but a trunk? > > One possible explaination is that the trunk was larger on the inside > than on the outside, but it would seem that Harry would have commented > on a size discrepancy that glaringly obvious. It seems the likely > explaination, but seems unlikely that it would occur without comment. > > From the limited information available, it would seem to me that a > trunk was entirely unworkable under the circumstance. But on the other > hand, it did seem to work. So, I don't know. > > Just a thought. > > bboy_mn Possibly the trunk was "magically expanded" the same way as was done with the Weasley's car. - Lana Lovegood From darkthirty at shaw.ca Wed Nov 5 18:36:42 2003 From: darkthirty at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 18:36:42 -0000 Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) In-Reply-To: <20031105114243.37005.qmail@web20714.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84152 Granny - Wouldn't any work of fiction be the author's perception of the relationship between a fictional world and the real world? This is the real beauty and value of fictional literature. A reader enters the authors world and draws parallels in his own. dan - Well, not really. At the start of the whole series, JKR dropped a bomb and it hasn't yet exploded (Grindelwald and his "defeat.") It is specific to the HP universe, as well, that it is parallel to the muggle world literally - they are mostly unseen to each other, but affect and are affected by each other, at certain key points. This is not the norm in literature. It is, however, part of JKR's subject. > > Dan: > Potter's anger reflects the anger that an author might feel at the death of the literary reason d'etre of a book?!?! > > Granny: > Sorry, can't agree here. Seems to me that Potter's anger clearly comes from his feelings of being kept in the dark. His anger is clearly within the framework of the story. What would his anger have to do with the literary raison d'etre? Dan - That the series is a kid's book series is no longer an issue. This must be of some relief to JKR, I would imagine. And also, liberating, in the subjects with which she can deal in the series. I wonder if the alchemical interpretations of Hans, on one hand, and Grainger on the other are familiar to you. If analytical approaches like that to the book are germane, than aren't my more rhetorically based speculations also valid? > Dan: > Possibly. But, if I am correct, then what makes Luna different is that she is almost entirely RW - strangely enough a character satisfying certain fan ficcy type impulses, one one hand, but completely modeled, or rather designed, as a real-life, real person. > > Granny: > Luna, RW. OK, I can see your point. There is always a spicy distracted type in every crowd. But the fact that she went through the entire ordeal of battling with the DE's in the Department of Mysteries along with Harry, Ron, Hermione, Ginny and Neville and was the only one that came out without so much as a scratch is significant in wizarding terms. Dan - the fact that she went through the ordeal nearly to the end (you forget she was knocked out) I take as a subtle statement that what, in one situation, is spaciness, might come in handy in certain other situations as lack of panic. But my point is more towards the late introduction of the character, the fact of the chapter to herself, and the fact that her exchange with Potter at the end of OOP is the only emotional "opening" in the book, and is just what HP needs after Dumbledore's admission of fallability - an "openness" of a different sort. Why does Luna's character come into the book as a breath of fresh air? Her experiences of the world are not what we have come to know in the other books. The space between ourselves and Potter now has an intermediary, in some ways not unlike so- called "mary sues" in fan fiction. But of course JKR has some essential role for Lovegood. Right now, that role is as another, alternate, more clearly emotional/spiritual, if you will, path to the Potter behind the scar. That is the function I am talking about, and in terms of the books, I propose that the alternate path is necessary. Neither Ron nor Hermione can take us there. Luna can. That is why she is necessary. dan From moorequests at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 19:29:22 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 19:29:22 -0000 Subject: About Neville's parents Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84153 I have a theory about what is going on with Neville's parents, (thanks to some folks on another list) but I want to see if anyone here else is thinking along the same lines I am... or able to give me some new and different ideas to work into the theory. Sherlock Holmes said, after all, it's a capital mistake to theorize before you have your data. Perhaps I'm missing some data. so here's my question to you all: When Neville's mom approaches him and gives him the Droobles bubble gum wrapper, his grandmother mentions that she's given him thousands, and Neville takes it and puts it in his pocket. Is this just significant that Mrs. Longbottom has lost her mind, or do you think she's trying to say something to Neville? I really didn't think it was signficant the first time I read it, but the second time, I wasn't so sure. What's your reaction? I've got a theory and some evidence to back it up, but before I post that, I want to hear what you think. -M.M. From bcbgx6 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 03:22:03 2003 From: bcbgx6 at yahoo.com (Brian) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 03:22:03 -0000 Subject: SHIP: movie contamination Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84154 Just a thought out of nowhere... I was polling a couple of my students about their SHIPping preferences. The thought occurred to me that my R/H SHIP inclination, and SHIPping in general is a product of movie contamination. Romantic prospects don't seem as salient in the books. Steve Kloves is an obvious R/H-er and I think his presentation of those characters has changed the way I read them in Rowling's books. Character interaction in books one and two seems more matter-of-fact than the movie representations. "Brian" ADMIN: This post is almost more appropriate for HPfGU-Movie, but if the responses to this message focus on what the books say about R/H, how one's reading of the books is affected by outside influences (e.g., the movie, other websites, etc.), or on the merits of R/H vs. other SHIPs (keeping the SHIP prefix in the subject line, of course), the thread will be on-topic. References to the movies should shed light on the text, not on the movie. (It's a fine line, we know, but do your best.) If list members wish to discuss the R/H-ness of the movies, Steve Kloves, or anyone else asociated with the movie, the discussion must move to HPfGU-Movie, at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/hpfgu-movie Thanks! From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 5 19:58:38 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 19:58:38 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84155 Laura: > > It is *not* > > cute, loving or desirable to treat your grown children as > > emotionally dependent all their lives. If this is where Molly is > > headed, that's bad news. I don't think her kids will put up with > > it. It is *not* desirable to lose your identity in your family. > > Women who are mothers, even full time mothers (like me) have to have some sort of independent emotional and/or intellectual lives to be healthy and balanced human beings. > > ...snip... > > The problem is hers, not his. No mother can be > > everything to her children, and thinking that is a sure recipe for disaster. > > > > It is rather interesting that JKR would portray such a traditional societal structure. << > Art: > > I agree with Laura's assessment/questioning of JKR's intentions with Molly. Going out on a limb, perhaps JKR is portraying Molly as the "mother" she wishes she could have been. What I'm getting at here is the transition of the author from out of work and poor to the millions of dollars, nice husband, new child thing she has now. > I'm really waiting for some of JKR's past to surface in her books. I really hope that it doesn't manifest itself as evil. That would be a huge setback, and utterly unnecessary in this modern world. What doesn't kill us makes us stronger. IMO, JKR may think that Molly is a great mom, I am not sold. There are moms of all kinds. Ethnic, good, bad, suburban, stereotypical, super-hero, down-in-the-mud die- hards... Sirius could have been a break from the mundane old- fashioned life that is portrayed in these books. He could have been the single, hard-working, affectionate, and decent parent. We will never get that opportunity to witness the beauty of the new age of parenthood. No, instead he is killed off, accused of living through Harry, and so many other things that "make him a bad parent" I CRY INJUSTICE!!! Molly too lives vicariously through her children. What parent doesn't from time to time? Why is that ok for her, and not for > Sirius? I'll tell you why... Sirius was single, Molly is not. And we think these books are about racial predudice.... > > Children need to be taught that both men and women need to work hard to accomplish their goals. There are no more free rides, death-til-we part-happy-endings and any person who preaches this is deluding the future. While suburban moms in mini-vans can pretend they are liberated, how many of them can claim that they are the main breadwinner? There is still a HUGE gap in what the real world out > there IS and what messages we teach to our daughters. Fortunetly, HP > is about a boy. Unfortunetly, the leading girl is deluged in 80's > thinking. I'd write more on this, but am running long. Pippin: What women in the wizarding world aren't working hard to accomplish their goals? I see the WW as post-feminist in some ways. The women in the WW, in contrast to the men, all seem to know what they want and how to get it. There's an assumption, it seems to me, on the part of some feminist critics, that any woman who is not struggling desperately has given up. But what if they're simply on track to get what they want, and haven't got to struggle for anything? We don't know what Hermione wants for herself apart from being a terrific student. I think that's part of the suspense. What's going to happen if Hermione wants a life like her Muggle mother has, but in the wizarding world. Will it be allowed? I don't agree that Molly's attempts to keep authority over her grown children mean that she is trying to live vicariously through them. Molly's offspring live in her world, not ours. We value independence from family, but in more traditional cultures the family has multi-generational responsibilities. It has to. The institutions that oversee cultural transmission and social support in our society, ie universities, organized religion, the welfare state, are either undeveloped or don't exist at all. The MOM isn't much of a welfare state. We have JKR's word that there is no higher education in the WW. Organized religion, though represented by the ghosts of the Fat Friar and the nuns at the death day party, seems to have faded away. Molly sees maintaining the values of her family, grown or not, as part of her job, and really, if she didn't, who would? Even though the twins are of age, Hermione realizes that neither the school nor the MOM has the influence on them than Molly does. In traditional cultures, the matriarch may have authority over several generations of her male offspring, and especially their wives, for as long as she lives. In that context, the message of the tiny egg is probably not, "You slut!" (that would call for no gift at all) but "I don't like what I'm hearing about you and it had better not be true!" Just because JKR depicts a more traditional society doesn't mean that she's nostalgic for it. She lets us bask in the rosy glow of torchlight and gaslamps the better to make us blink painfully when she shines a spotlight on what the good ole days were really like: slavery, the double standard ( it's okay for Krum and Lockhart to have a flock of admirers, but a lass is only supposed to encourage one beau at a time) and most of all exclusion and intolerance. And while JKR's life story would make a good Danielle Steele novel, I don't see why JKR has to write it. Isn't the fact that she's lived it enough? Pippin working mom, main breadwinner, married, has never owned a mini-van From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Wed Nov 5 19:55:46 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 14:55:46 -0500 Subject: Hermione's secrets (was Lupin's sense of humor) Message-ID: <001101c3a3d6$ce286af0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 84156 > Jen said: > > > Hermione is the interesting one. Lupin wouldn't know anything about > her, being Muggle-born. I guess he could know about the basilisk > from Dumbledore. If a boggart/dementor can cause Harry to feel the > same as a real dementor, could a boggart/basilisk actually petrify > or kill someone? If so, then they wouldn't let Hermione face a > boggart in her end-of-term exam (where she *said* she saw McGonagall > telling her she failed--I don't buy that!). Now Joj: I think Hermione has many secrets. She is based on JKR (who I bet is a fantastic poker player) after all. We know Hermione can keep a secret like nobody's business (time-turner, Lupin is a werewolf, Krum as her date, ect.). JKR has kept many things about Hermione a mystery. We don't know what she decided on in career counseling. I don't believe we know one detail of her childhood (reactions when she got her letter, how her parents felt, what kind of accidental magic she did). We don't know who she has romantic feelings for (Harry, Ron, Krum, Lupin, somebody else) if anybody. JKR has kept her a mystery for a reason. She also was elevated in status and importance in Harry's life, IMO, in OoP. I think BIG things are in store for our little Hermy. I think it will have something to do with house-elves or with her feelings for Harry. (Oops, my shipping is showing) Joj "Bills travel through the mail at twice the speed of checks" From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 20:23:46 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 20:23:46 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84157 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > We don't know what Hermione wants for herself apart from being > a terrific student. I think that's part of the suspense. What's going to happen if Hermione wants a life like her Muggle mother has, > but in the wizarding world. Will it be allowed? You mean if she wants to be a wizarding dentist? :-) I agree they could certainly use one. What with Sirius and Snape's yellow teeth (it seems like there were some additional yellow teeth, also), and Hagrid getting his knocked out by Grawp.... can't imagine why it wouldn't be "allowed". Who's going to prevent her? Erin From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 20:43:38 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 20:43:38 -0000 Subject: Maturity as a theme in OoP and Sirius' future plot relevance (WAS: Sirius quite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84158 > Kneasy wrote: > [Sirius'] unexpected demise plus Harry's reaction would be a prime > counterpoint to startling revelations indicating that he was not > what he seemed. > > Tom: > You know, I'd go for this whole idea that Sirius was not what he > seemed to be, if only for the fact that it's already been done > repeatedly. Laura: Not that it's impossible-nothing is impossible in JKR's writing-but have we learned that any dead character is the opposite of what he/she seemed to be? I exclude James here; we have more to learn about him, I think, and besides, just because he was a teenaged jerk doesn't make him Ever So Evil. > Kneasy: > Why knock him off in Book 5 of seven? The suggestion that this > somehow enhances Harry's passage into emotional maturity is > post facto rationalisation IMO. Fans were having great difficulty in coming up with a good plot line justifying it and so descended > into pop psychology to find an acceptable reason. > > Tom: > But Kneasy, that's what this list is all about! Post-facto > rationalization is what makes HPfGU go `round, wouldn't you say? I > mean, it's what constitutes nearly all of the theoretical endeavors that go on around here. I mean, without post-facto rationalization, what would we have to do, anyways? ;-) What Kneasy calls post facto rationalization some of us would call literary analysis. *grin* Explaining characters' actions by theorizing about their psychological motivations is eminently reasonable-otherwise the explanation is "because the author made him do it". Kneasy: > But just suppose that there is a plot line to his death and that his disappearance makes Harry safer.... > > Tom: > It seems to me that Harry is, in every way, less > safe after OoP. And on that note, Sirius' death concretely and > thematically makes Harry *less* safe, since Sirius, from PoA through OoP, was both one of Harry's prime guardians and one of his trusted confidants. Laura: It's hard to believe that Harry could be any safer while LV is alive and well. Kneasy, if Sirius turns out to be ESE, then I'll have to congratulate you and your fellow Siriophobes on your acuity. I'm not going to get all exercised now-we still have lots of canon to go. Nice try, though. From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 21:01:09 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 21:01:09 -0000 Subject: Magical Travel (& Groups Search Info) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84159 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote in > message 84130: > > > > Magical travel is such a fun subject. > > > > Just a thought. > > > > bboy_mn > > > > Bohcoo responds: > SS, ch. 6, page 89, American edition. Uncle Vernon speaking to Harry: > > "'Funny way to get to a wizards' school, the train. Magic carpets > all got punctures, have they?'" > > (Do you know if there is an analysis of all the forms of magical > travel and the pluses and minuses of each form of travel?) > > Thoughts back, > Bohcoo :) bboy_mn: I don't think there is one comprehensive indepth analysis of magical travel in the group, but there is a lot of great information. However, as much as I hate to blow my own horn (no I don't! Woo-Hoo! Toot to to toot to toot!) if you search this group for... bboy_mn portkey ...you will find links to tons and tons of in-depth discussion of magical travel. This is well worth doing we have had some very good very recent discussions on magical travel from portkeys to the nature of Threstral travel. Note to the Group: Here is something I have discovered about the [Search Archive] feature attached to this group, when you search and look at the results, you eventually come to a screen that say "No matches found in the messages searched". Up until recently I would given up at that point, but I discovered that the search feature searchs blocks of posts, and not the entire archive. Saying, "No matches found in the messages searched", doesn't mean there aren't any matches in the group, if only means that in the small block of 5,000 of the most current posts, it didn't find a match. Click the [NEXT] button and it will search another 5,000 posts and give you the results. Even if is says there aren't any results, as long as the [NEXT] button is active, you can keep searching. Remember that there are nearly 100,000 posts in the active part of this group, and probably as many in the HP4GU-Archive. So keep clicking that [NEXT] button; you are limited only by how far back in time you want to search (earliest available post is from August 28, 2000), and of course, how much time you want to spend searching. If you have some favorite posters in the group, try combining their handle (bboy_mn) with the subject you want to seach (portkey), that can help weed out a lot of extra unwanted posts. Just a thought. bboy_mn From eclipse021342 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 20:31:36 2003 From: eclipse021342 at yahoo.com (Eclipse) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 12:31:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's summer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031105203136.18946.qmail@web80710.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84160 I don't have my books on me, but is there any mention about why Hermione is already at 12 Grimmauld Place. I got the impression that she had been there for a while. Was there some reason that she couldn't have stayed with her parents? If she was in danger, won't her parents still be without her there? Eclipse --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 5 21:05:33 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 21:05:33 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84161 Pippin previously: > > We don't know what Hermione wants for herself apart from being a terrific student. I think that's part of the suspense. What's going to happen if Hermione wants a life like her Muggle mother has, but in the wizarding world. Will it be allowed?<< Erinelli: > You mean if she wants to be a wizarding dentist? :-) I agree they could certainly use one. What with Sirius and Snape's yellow teeth (it seems like there were some additional yellow teeth, also), and Hagrid getting his knocked out by Grawp.... can't imagine why it wouldn't be "allowed". Who's going to prevent her?< Pippin: LOL! But say, pace Shippers, that Hermione wants to marry a Weasley. Will St. Mungo's refuse to train her as a wizarding dentist/healer because everybody knows that Weasley wives have umpteen zillion children and no time for another career? If she decides not to have umpteen zillion children, will she be getting tiny easter eggs for the rest of Molly's life? Pippin From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Wed Nov 5 21:31:49 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 21:31:49 -0000 Subject: Sirius and Alchemy,again (Re: Sirius quite capable) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84162 Sorry,but I'm not sure I managed to send this post correctly the first time. Of course, the nice list-elves can cancel it if it's already on the board! --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: (snip) > Lots of plot twists in the books to date; I'd not be surprised if > Sirius constituted another. > > His unexpected demise plus Harry's reaction would be a prime > counterpoint to startling revelations indicating that he was > not what he seemed. > > Why knock him off in Book 5 of seven? The suggestion that this > somehow enhances Harry's passage into emotional maturity is > post facto rationalisation IMO. Fans were having great difficulty in > coming up with a good plot line justifying it and so descended > into pop psychology to find an acceptable reason. > > But just suppose that there is a plot line to his death and that his > disappearance makes Harry safer.... > > Kneasy > Who can hear the screams of outrage already. Hi Kneasy, Though Sirius is my favourite character after Harry, I won't put the blame on you for writing that the plot line needed him to die. Of course he was a perfect confident for Harry; of course, as Steve pointed it in the post that started that threat, he had "the independent and adventurous spirit of youth". He was a comforting reflection for Harry; he understood him rather well, and was a male figure Harry could easily identify with (I remember by the way that I posted something about that subject last summer however I don't remember the title). But I'm not sure that the fascination Sirius did exert over Harry was actually a good thing. What Steve wrote concerning his " independent and adventurous spirit of youth" (sorry Steve, I should have quoted your post too) is very interesting. It shows that Sirius was in a certain way unable to pass completely the gap between the teenager we see in the Pensieve scene and the adult man he had become. Teenage Sirius was like the Favourite in King James's world. He probably knew that James would have done everything to please him, even reprehensible acts like bullying Snape. Okay, some will say that, being certainly miserable in his own family, Sirius needed James's affection. He was not his mother's favourite child, but he could find compensation with James, etc, etc But debating this is not my purpose here. What I'm trying to explain, is that Sirius, in a sort of way, was still mentally a teenager. We can understand him. How wouldn't he have missed the time he was 15, the time he had a friend who was like a brother, the time he was one of Hogwarts top guys? How wouldn't he have tried to recover what 12 years in Azkaban had broken? Harry was there, looking like James. Though he was a responsible godfather, Sirius couldn't help trying unconsciously to play the same game he used to play with James. That's why one time he blames his godson for not looking enough like his father. Poor Harry Did he really deserve that? I myself don't like what I'm about to write, but Harry is better alone than suffering Sirius's grieves. One of the HP series lessons is that the past is the past. You may change it a little with a Time Turner, but you can't change it completely. And above everything, you must overpass it, that's the sine qua non condition if you want to live. Harry saved Sirius in PoA, giving him an opportunity to live and to go on. But Sirius didn't manage to take completely this second chance, and because of that, the sentence was only deferred. Sirius could only die, because he wasn't able to go further, psychologically and metaphorically. That's what JKR means, IMO, when she writes that entering Sirius's home was like entering a dying person's home. >From the moment when Harry saved his life to the moment he passed beyond the Veil, Sirius did nothing but dying a little day by day, mentally, because he couldn't overpass his own past. I was very sad when he went away. But for Harry, it's better that way, though he's suffering, though he's alone, though he feels guilty. That's the lesson he has to take from his own reflection in the small mirror at the end of the book: he can't see nothing but his own eyes, i.e, he can face clearly the problem, and this problem is him. He has to cope with what he is, with what he has done, with what he has to do. He has to face the scar, as I wrote one day, that means to open his "inner eye" to make the right choices. He must do it on his own. Sirius was too much prisoner of the past to help him to go further. John Granger's article helped me a lot to understand why Sirius had to die. I was convinced since my first reading of the books that Alchemy was a huge key to understand them completely, and I'm glad to find in the article a confirmation. It's particularly relevant in Sirius's case. Just some quotes: " Order of the Phoenix is the nigredo volume of the series. Harry is burnt up, broken down or dissolved, and bled until everything that he thought he was?star Quidditch player, his best friend's superior, pet of the headmaster, lover of his school, son and spitting image of a great man, victim of the Dursleys, valiant enemy of Snape, even his being the hero and man of action in time of crisis?is taken from him or revealed as falsehood. The boundaries of his world collapse; magical enemies come to his home with the Dur- sleys, and Aunt Petunia knows about them. The Dursleys' house is no longer a sanctuary, however miserable, and Hogwarts is no longer edifying or any joy to him. The world is no longer separated into good guys and bad guys. Harry has been reduced to his formless elements. Whether the white stage is to follow this black novel, however, and a climax to follow in the seventh and final book turning on Hagrid the Red, Order of the Phoenix is Rowling's nigredo volume." Nigredo volume, Black volume. Metaphorically, Sirius is an ambivalent figure. He's there to give Harry some affection, but also to make him suffer, with his loneliness, with his grieves, with his death. He's at the same time a model (because he loves his godson, he's ready to risk his own life) and an example of what Harry mustn't do (because he's too emotional, he acts in such a way it ends in a disaster). That's enough to make him one of the greatest characters in the series and that's enough to make him disappear, in order to give Harry the opportunity to go further. Thanks to Sirius, because of him, Harry is burnt up, as John Granger writes. Speaking of Kingsley Shacklebolt, he says also that he is a figure of the "black king". He adds the black king "must die, usually by drowing". Couldn't we comment that it is precisely what Sirius does when he falls in the dark waters of the waving Veil? He leaves Harry alone, "burned to a cinder" to take Granger's words. He leaves him ready to a new initiatory journey. He accomplished his mission, and we , readers, have to accept that. Amicalement, Iris, waiting for "Harry Potter et l'Ordre du Ph?nix", with the unrealistic hope that Sirius won't die in the French version. From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Nov 5 21:33:29 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 21:33:29 -0000 Subject: Maturity as a theme in OoP and Sirius' future plot relevance (WAS: Sirius quite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84163 > > Kneasy: > > Why knock him off in Book 5 of seven? The suggestion that this > > somehow enhances Harry's passage into emotional maturity is > > post facto rationalisation IMO. Fans were having great difficulty > in coming up with a good plot line justifying it and so descended > > into pop psychology to find an acceptable reason. > > > > Tom: > > But Kneasy, that's what this list is all about! Post-facto > > rationalization is what makes HPfGU go 'round, wouldn't you say? > > I mean, it's what constitutes nearly all of the theoretical > endeavors that go on around here. I mean, without post-facto > rationalization, what would we have to do, anyways? ;-) > > Laura: > What Kneasy calls post facto rationalization some of us would call > literary analysis. *grin* Explaining characters' actions by > theorizing about their psychological motivations is eminently > reasonable-otherwise the explanation is "because the author made > him do it". Jen: Just to descend for a moment into the "author made him do it" category, that actually is a good explanation for Sirius' death at the moment (as you say Laura, there's still canon to go, so I might be swayed ). I mean, what else can you do with Sirius? He's literally and figuratively backed into a corner--can't leave the house, isn't safe anywhere in the world apparently, can't do much for the Order, has massive emotional baggage that the WW is unable or unwilling to deal with--can JKR really leave him smoldering in Grimmauld Place for two more books? I think she did the noble thing and gave him a way out, a hero's way out at that--dying to save his best friend's son. And while I don't think Sirius *had* to die in order for Harry to make a big leap in his moral development, I do agree this is exactly what happened (seeing as the character had to die anyway without any reasonable plot development left ). Harry is already learning about his reckless side, his penchant for 'playing hero' in OOTP prior to Sirius' death, but his death does speed up the process of realization quite a bit! From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Wed Nov 5 20:46:10 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 20:46:10 -0000 Subject: Sirius and Alchemy, again (Re: Sirius quite capable) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84164 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: (snip) > Lots of plot twists in the books to date; I'd not be surprised if > Sirius constituted another. > > His unexpected demise plus Harry's reaction would be a prime > counterpoint to startling revelations indicating that he was > not what he seemed. > > Why knock him off in Book 5 of seven? The suggestion that this > somehow enhances Harry's passage into emotional maturity is > post facto rationalisation IMO. Fans were having great difficulty in > coming up with a good plot line justifying it and so descended > into pop psychology to find an acceptable reason. > > But just suppose that there is a plot line to his death and that his > disappearance makes Harry safer.... > > Kneasy > Who can hear the screams of outrage already. Hi Kneasy, Though Sirius is my favourite character after Harry, I won't put the blame on you for writing that the plot line needed him to die. Of course he was a perfect confident for Harry; of course, as Steve pointed it in the post that started that threat, he had "the independent and adventurous spirit of youth". He was a comforting reflection for Harry; he understood him rather well, and was a male figure Harry could easily identify with (I remember by the way that I posted something about that subject last summer however I don't remember the title). But I'm not sure that the fascination Sirius did exert over Harry was actually a good thing. What Steve wrote concerning his " independent and adventurous spirit of youth" (sorry Steve, I should have quoted your post too) is very interesting. It shows that Sirius was in a certain way unable to pass completely the gap between the teenager we see in the Pensieve scene and the adult man he had become. Teenage Sirius was like the Favourite in King James's world. He probably knew that James would have done everything to please him, even reprehensible acts like bullying Snape. Okay, some will say that, being certainly miserable in his own family, Sirius needed James's affection. He was not his mother's favourite child, but he could find compensation with James, etc, etc But debating this is not my purpose here. What I'm trying to explain, is that Sirius, in a sort of way, was still mentally a teenager. We can understand him. How wouldn't he have missed the time he was 15, the time he had a friend who was like a brother, the time he was one of Hogwarts top guys? How wouldn't he have tried to recover what 12 years in Azkaban had broken? Harry was there, looking like James. Though he was a responsible godfather, Sirius couldn't help trying unconsciously to play the same game he used to play with James. That's why one time he blames his godson for not looking enough like his father. Poor Harry Did he really deserve that? I myself don't like what I'm about to write, but Harry is better alone than suffering Sirius's grieves. One of the HP series lessons is that the past is the past. You may change it a little with a Time Turner, but you can't change it completely. And above everything, you must overpass it, that's the sine qua non condition if you want to live. Harry saved Sirius in PoA, giving him an opportunity to live and to go on. But Sirius didn't manage to take completely this second chance, and because of that, the sentence was only deferred. Sirius could only die, because he wasn't able to go further, psychologically and metaphorically. That's what JKR means, IMO, when she writes that entering Sirius's home was like entering a dying person's home. >From the moment when Harry saved his life to the moment he passed beyond the Veil, Sirius did nothing but dying a little day by day, mentally, because he couldn't overpass his own past. I was very sad when he went away. But for Harry, it's better that way, though he's suffering, though he's alone, though he feels guilty. That's the lesson he has to take from his own reflection in the small mirror at the end of the book: he can't see nothing but his own eyes, i.e, he can face clearly the problem, and this problem is him. He has to cope with what he is, with what he has done, with what he has to do. He has to face the scar, as I wrote one day, that means to open his "inner eye" to make the right choices. He must do it on his own. Sirius was too much prisoner of the past to help him to go further. John Granger's article helped me a lot to understand why Sirius had to die. I was convinced since my first reading of the books that Alchemy was a huge key to understand them completely, and I'm glad to find in the article a confirmation. It's particularly relevant in Sirius's case. Just some quotes: " Order of the Phoenix is the nigredo volume of the series. Harry is burnt up, broken down or dissolved, and bled until everything that he thought he was?star Quidditch player, his best friend's superior, pet of the headmaster, lover of his school, son and spitting image of a great man, victim of the Dursleys, valiant enemy of Snape, even his being the hero and man of action in time of crisis?is taken from him or revealed as falsehood. The boundaries of his world collapse; magical enemies come to his home with the Dur- sleys, and Aunt Petunia knows about them. The Dursleys' house is no longer a sanctuary, however miserable, and Hogwarts is no longer edifying or any joy to him. The world is no longer separated into good guys and bad guys. Harry has been reduced to his formless elements. Whether the white stage is to follow this black novel, however, and a climax to follow in the seventh and final book turning on Hagrid the Red, Order of the Phoenix is Rowling's nigredo volume." Nigredo volume, Black volume. Metaphorically, Sirius is an ambivalent figure. He's there to give Harry some affection, but also to make him suffer, with his loneliness, with his grieves, with his death. He's at the same time a model (because he loves his godson, he's ready to risk his own life) and an example of what Harry mustn't do (because he's too emotional, he acts in such a way it ends in a disaster). That's enough to make him one of the greatest characters in the series and that's enough to make him disappear, in order to give Harry the opportunity to go further. Thanks to Sirius, because of him, Harry is burnt up, as John Granger writes. Speaking of Kingsley Shacklebolt, he says also that he is a figure of the "black king". He adds the black king "must die, usually by drowing". Couldn't we comment that it is precisely what Sirius does when he falls in the dark waters of the waving Veil? He leaves Harry alone, "burned to a cinder" to take Granger's words. He leaves him ready to a new initiatory journey. He accomplished his mission, and we , readers, have to accept that. Amicalement, Iris, waiting for "Harry Potter et l'Ordre du Ph?nix", with the unrealistic hope that Sirius won't die in the french version... From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Wed Nov 5 22:31:45 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 22:31:45 -0000 Subject: About Neville's parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84165 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "moorequests" wrote: > I have a theory about what is going on with Neville's parents, > (thanks to some folks on another list) but I want to see if anyone > here else is thinking along the same lines I am... or able to give me > some new and different ideas to work into the theory. Sherlock Holmes > said, after all, it's a capital mistake to theorize before you have > your data. Perhaps I'm missing some data. > > so here's my question to you all: > > When Neville's mom approaches him and gives him the Droobles bubble > gum wrapper, his grandmother mentions that she's given him thousands, > and Neville takes it and puts it in his pocket. Is this just > significant that Mrs. Longbottom has lost her mind, or do you think > she's trying to say something to Neville? I really didn't think it > was signficant the first time I read it, but the second time, I > wasn't so sure. > > What's your reaction? I've got a theory and some evidence to back it > up, but before I post that, I want to hear what you think. > > -M.M. Do you mean something like: she recovered her mind but is kept in St Mungo as a prisoner? After all, we don't know if it's a reliable place; they let Devil Snares killing one of their patients... And didn't JKR say that Lucius Malfoy used to give them money? I hope Harry will be healthy in book 6, that he won't be poisoned or wounded! Amicalement, Iris From vam0609 at aol.com Wed Nov 5 22:14:51 2003 From: vam0609 at aol.com (kuligkutig) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 22:14:51 -0000 Subject: Sir Nick and Sirius Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84166 I'm sorry if this has been discussed already, but it just hit me after I read one of the post about Sirius' death. In that scene where Harry seek out Sir Nick to asked him about wizards who can come back as ghost, I remember that even before Harry asked Nick about the possibility that Sirius can come back as a ghost, Sir Nick immidiately said "No, he's not coming back"(I don't have the book with me so I'm not sure if this is the exact quote) and then he explained why he(Nick) came back and why other dead wizards don't. My point is how does he know that Sirius will not be coming back? Is it because he knows Sirius was somebody brave when he was still at school? Or did he already meet and talk to Sirius from the Great Beyond? If that's the case then Harry can use Nick to communicate with his parents or Sirius and vice versa. Imagine all the possibilities. What do you think? vampire1 From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Wed Nov 5 22:47:41 2003 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 22:47:41 -0000 Subject: First name adressing = same House? + Snape the Vampire (yes, again) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84167 There was some talk recently that James and Lily might not have been in the same House at Hogwarts since they adressed each other by their last names. I wonder in which house Hagrid was back then - do we have any canon to tell? The reason I wonder is because in CoS (chapter 13) Tom Riddle and Hagrid adress each other by first name: "'Evening, Rubeus,' said Riddle sharply. The boy slammed the door shut and stood up. 'What yer doin' down here, Tom?'" Riddle and Hagrid were 2 years apart when they were at Hogwarts and it seems a bit strange that they use first names (and this was in the 40's when I assume that using last names was even more common between people who didn't socialise with each other?) ---- Second. In PoA Sirius is at first described in a way that reminds me a lot of Snape (long, black hair, waxy white skin etc.) - and in Chapter 3 it says: "Harry had never met a vampire, but he had seen pictures of them in his Defence Against the Dark Arts classes, and Black looked just like one." I never thought of Black as a possible Vampire but as the describtion of him reminded me of Snape I (once again) got to think that there must be something there :-) Inge From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 22:55:45 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 22:55:45 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups]The Burrow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84168 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, John and Peg > > wrote: > > > Does anyone know where The Burrow may be? ... > > > > > > John & Peg > > > > bboy_mn: > > > > It is beleived to be in Devon which is in the southwest of > > England. > > > Geoff: > ... The Burrow ...there appear to be some anomalies in JKR's > description of the place, especially in relation to its location. > > The favoured position for many people is in the area of Ottery > St.Mary. This lies on the river Otter just east of Exeter. ... > Several names in the area ? Venn Ottery, Otterton and Upottery ? > reflect the river connection. ...edited... > > ... Ottery St.Mary ... to London about 165 miles or so. > > The first problem is in COS when they get up at cock-crow and dash > around before leaving and then find things have been forgotten. > "They had almost reached the motorway when Ginny shrieked that she'd > left her diary " ...edited... The logical way from the Ottery > St.Mary area ... would be to pick up the A30 near Honiton, then > A303/M3 into London. I, although living quite a bit further north, > avoid the M5 and use A358/A303/M3 when going into London. ..edited.. bboy_mn: Hummm... the USA edition says 'highway' instead of 'motorway', to someone in the USA that might not seem like much of a distinction, but in the UK, 'motorway' is the same as 'Interstate Freeway' in the US. General main highways in the UK are referred to as 'Primary' roads, and I assume that smalled 'back' roads are referred to as 'secondary'. Again, I'm working from maps, certainly our UK residence can give us more refind information. The point is, and part of the point I think Geoff is making, is that the in the UK the use of Motorway is very specific, and implies one of the major highways who's designation begins with 'M', as in motorway/highway 'M5'. Roads, we in the US, would call highways, begin with the letter 'A'. The 'M5' that Geoff is referring to is a road that goes north from roughly Exeter in the south to Bristol. That would mean traveling about 50 miles north before turning east toward London; not a very direct route. If you have a map, you will see that the suggested A30/A303/M3 combination is nearly a straight line directly to London and made up of major two lane and four lane highways with the last +50 miles into London being a major Motorway/Interstate Freeway. > geoff continues: > > ... Muggle taxis in GOF ... go from The Burrow to Kings Cross, > about 165 miles. To get a taxi from my village into Taunton, which > is about 30 miles, recently cost a friend ?42.00 (about USD 60). So > three taxis into London from East Devon would be in the stratosphere > financially. ... who's picking up the tab? Surely not the > Ministry - they do not seem to consider Harry under threat ... > bboy_mn: Thank you for that example of taxi prices; something I have been looking for for a long time. I think this help illustrate that no matter where the Burrow is, near or far, that three taxis to London would have been pohibitively expensive for the Weasleys. Even you example time 3, is $180. That's not chump change for a working class family. There is only two people/entities that I can think of that could afford a taxi ride like that. The first is the Ministry. I have no problem with them paying for the taxis. You can say that Harry wasn't in any danger, but Harry wasn't in any danger when he and the Weasleys received a small fortune in prime box seat tickets to the Quidditch World Cup. Could anyone in Britian speculate what the cost of 10 VIP prime box seat would be to the Soccer World Cup if it were played in England? I think my statement of 'small fortune' would be fairly accurate. Do you really think Mr. Weasley would have recieved the BEST SEATS IN THE HOUSE, if Harry wasn't with them? I think not. Next regarding the Ministry, I think they know more about Harry than we are giving them credit for. They know Harry, in the past, is linked to a specific event of immense importance to the wizard world, the defeat or at least ghostification of Voldemort, but I am very sure they also know that Harry is destine to play a very important role in the future of the wizard world. Trelawney isn't the only prophet or 'reader of the signs' in the wizard world. Information about Harry's destiny would surely come from many different sources. Example, the centaurs seem to know A LOT more than they are letting on in the surface 'ink' of the books. Even if the Ministry doesn't have direct knowledge of the Prophecy, I'm convinced that it is general knowledge amoung the 'higher-ups' in the wizard world that Harry is destine to be vitally important to the wizard world. In the latest book, Dumbledore said it was time to tell Harry 'everything'. To that I say, HA! I seriously doubt Dumbeldore even told him one tenth of 'everything'. Consequently, I have no problem seeing the Ministry picking up the bill for three taxis. The alternative is for Dumbledore to have paid. We know from the latest book that Dumbledore has been watching and guarding Harry far more closely than we have seen from the surface of the printed page. I'm sure Dumbledore would want to assist Harry in his safe journey to Hogwarts from the Weasley's. So, I don't have any problem thinking that he would pay the bill. > Geoff continues: > > I believe that Jo Rowling had connections with Devon but the various > things I have outlined above raise questions in my mind. Possibly > they are items in the plot line which haven't been thought through > completely as not being vital to the main story line. > bboy_mn: I think every author hopes to some small degree that his/her readers will make some allowances for events that are slightly inconsistent but move the plot along. Example, why didn't Harry 'Accio' the map to him, when he was trapped on the stairs. Answer A.) he was a sacred kid who didn't think of it under the pressure of the moment; answer B.) because if he did, it would screw up part of the plot. The current book seems full of 'why did't they do it this way' events, and of course, the answer is, because if they did it that way, there wouldn't have been any story to tell. The Taxi Situation may or may not have a logical story related explaination, and JKR may or may not choose to reveal that explaination to us. In the mean time, all we can do is either doggeldy swear that it is a mistake, or speculate likely explaination. You know me, I go for the likely, and sometimes the unlikely, explaination every time. > Geoff closes: > > Finally, and a digression. I wonder whether the definition of "city" > in the US and Canada is different to the UK. ...edited... > > Geoff bboy_mn: Generally, villages and small towns are 0 to 999 people. Towns are 1,000 to 9,999, and cities are 10,000 and over. Although, that's more of a guideline than an absolute. Also, in Minnesota where I live, 'Village' is a legal designation for a small town and is a matter of public record. The town I grew up in, of about 400 people, was legally incorporated as a Village. In some states, the legal designation for a town of the same size might be different. Also, there can be a difference between common usage and legal definition. Our village is frequently referred to as a town. So, to some extent, the official designation really hinges on how the town has formed itself as a legal entity, and the official names and range of the legal designations can vary from state to state. Just a thought. bboy_mn From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 23:03:35 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 23:03:35 -0000 Subject: Hermione and a Boggart in a Trunk? In-Reply-To: <003f01c3a3a2$260fb960$5f97aec7@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84169 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" wrote: > > bboy_mn: > > Although, the book says no one truly knows > > what an 'uninfluenced' Boggart looks like, it seem reasonable to > > assume for the point of discussion that it is formless. > > > Iggy here: > > ...edited... > > If it's stated in PoA that nobody truly knows what an 'uninfluenced' > boggart looks like, ... How did Moody know it was a boggart when he > used his magic eye to look at the one Mrs. Weasley later tried to get > rid of ... > > > Iggy McSnurd bboy_mn: I think the boggart changing to whisps of dark smoke before vanishing completely, give us a clue to it natural form. However, Lupin does say that no one knows for sure. So, my most likely explaination for Moody's confidence is that he looked the desk and didn't see anything else he could identify, and by process of elimination that only left a bogart. Just a thought. bboy_mn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 22:27:36 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 22:27:36 -0000 Subject: Snape:Voldemort's faithful servant ? (again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84170 > > And about the presence/absence of Snape in the graveyard...All the > Deatheaters APPARATED in the graveyard. These events take place > during the tournament,and all the teachers are at Hogwarts. What if > Snape had been called by Voldy but COULDN'T join them because YOU > CANNOT APPARATE in Hogwarts (this is repeated in almost in every > book,must be important,no?) > > I think there may be a chance that Snape was at the graveyard. > There's nothing against him leaving the Hogwarts grounds and > apparating from there. In addition, it's possible for him to have > used a portkey. If you're looking on from a distance, then there's > no way to tell someone who comes in by apparation vs. someone who > arrives via portkey. So the no-apparition rule doesn't really pose > much of a barrier to his (possible) presence in the graveyard. Hi! This looks like as good a place as any for me to jump in. I know there's a post on this list stating that Rowling herself confirmed what to me is obvious: the coward is Karkaroff, the "faithful servant" is Barty Crouch, Jr., and the one whom Voldemort believes (I hope correctly) will not return is Snape. (We don't need to believe LV's statement that "he will be killed," which is of course only a statement of his intentions and not a prophesy.) There's also Snape's own statement that he will remain at Hogwart's and his contemptuous advice to Karkaroff to "flee" if he so desires (and, of course, he does). Note to Pippin, who posted the statement by JKR: Is your post a paraphrase or a direct quotation? Can you please provide a link? I spent half a day searching the Internet and can't find it. It's not among the archived interviews and must have been a news story. For the record, I like Snape because he's mysterious and complex--sinister yet not wholly evil, severe to his students but highly intelligent and gifted, thwarted in his ambitions and abused in his childhood yet no longer a Death Eater. I've read all the theories regarding his mission for Dumbledore and think that the spy theory is the most plausible, though he would have to do it through contacts like Lucius Malfoy rather than returning to Voldemort. (He'll need his gift for occlumency, I'm sure.) I certainly don't think he's a vampire or an animagus who can turn into a bat. I do think, however, that Dumbledore is right to trust him. And it's worth noting that Rowling referred to Dumbledore in one of her interviews as "the epitome of goodness." He's certainly wiser and less prejudiced in his view of Snape than Sirius (whom I do like and wish had not been killed). At least Snape was an enemy of Dolores Umbridge! BTW, I don't know whether this is relevant to the graveyard scene, but Harry recognized the hooded figure of Snape at a distance by his walk, and I think he would have known if Snape were present. Not to mention that Snape definitely WAS present at the Tri-Wizard Tournament and did not have enough time to answer the summons and reappear. Dumbledore would have noticed his absence. He certainly would not have shown Fudge the mark on his arm had he been there. Carol (new member) P.S. Forgive me for jumping in, but I've done a lot of thinking about this and it means a lot to me, so please keep your criticisms gentle. From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Wed Nov 5 23:23:23 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 23:23:23 -0000 Subject: (Re: Snape the Vampire (yes, again)) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84171 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: . > In PoA Sirius is at first described in a way that reminds me a lot of > Snape (long, black hair, waxy white skin etc.) - and in Chapter 3 it > says: > "Harry had never met a vampire, but he had seen pictures of them in > his Defence Against the Dark Arts classes, and Black looked just like > one." > I never thought of Black as a possible Vampire but as the describtion > of him reminded me of Snape I (once again) got to think that there > must be something there :-) > > Inge But Sirius, in a kind of way, is a mental vampire towards Harry, because he tries to influence him, because he fascinates him. He's rather dangerous. Would he be so attractive to both Harry and the reader if he wasn't? Plus, he's from an old aristocratic wizard family, he's handsome even after twelve years in Azkaban, etc, etc... He could be a very classical vampire, no? And it's true that the first portraits of him JKR gives us remind the way she depicts Snape. They both could have been designed by Aubrey Beardsley, they both share the same kind of theatrical appearances. It can't be a coincidence, but I confess that I can't explain it for the moment. Amicalement Iris From meriaugust at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 00:56:56 2003 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 00:56:56 -0000 Subject: First name adressing = same House? + Snape the Vampire (yes, again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84172 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > There was some talk recently that James and Lily might not have been > in the same House at Hogwarts since they adressed each other by their > last names. Just because people are in the same house doesn't mean that they refer to each other solely by their first names. Malfoy refers to Crabbe and Goyle exclusively by their last names and they are probably the closest friends he has. It just seems to be a matter of preference, depending on how well you know or like a particular person, whether you call them by their first or last names, regardless of house. From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 01:10:37 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 01:10:37 -0000 Subject: Sir Nick and Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84173 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kuligkutig" wrote: > ... I remember that even before Harry > asked Nick about the possibility that Sirius can come back as a > ghost, Sir Nick immidiately said "No, he's not coming back"... and > then he explained why he(Nick) came back and why other dead wizards > don't. My point is how does he know that Sirius will not be coming > back? ...edited... > > vampire1 bboy_mn: I think the first point is that an extremely vast majority of people who die, continue their journey contently to 'the Great Beyond'. I'm reminded of accounts of near death experiences, that typically go... The person feels an overwhelming sense of peace and contentment. They see a brilliant white light at the end of a tunnel and are inexplicably draw toward the white light. When they get there, they are frequently met by a deceased loved one or and angel who guides them the rest of their way to the 'Land Beyond the Veil'. Some of them, turn and look back at the earthly world as the travel through the tunnel or when the reach the white light at the end. They may even see the loved ones who remain behind on the mortal plane. While the feel a degree of sadness and longing for their loved one's left behind, in that moment of spiritual transition, the affairs of the mortal world suddenly seem so petty and insignificant. The Spiritual plane is so far far more enticing and important than the world of mortgages, car payments, jobs, holidays, nice clothes, and new furniture. Who would willingly turn back from eternal peace and contentment? Only someone who had tremendous unresolved torment on the earthly plane, or someone with a deep overwhelming fear of what lies beyond the Veil. The serenity of the spiritual plane is so great that many people who met their spiritual guides at the end of the tunnel, find that the spiritual guide tells them that this is not their time and they must go back. Most of these people are so enraptured by the serenity of the spiritual plane that they don't want to go back, but eventually are convinced by their spirit guide; so, with great reluctance they return. When the world beyond the Veil is so enticing, it's no wonder that Nick immmediately assumes that a strong confident man like Sirius would not turn back. Even not knowing Sirius, the odds alone would make Sirius not coming back a very safe bet. Also, there is the nature of Sirius's death. It was not a slow transition. He (best guess) did not travel down a tunnel to met his spiritual guide then continue his journey. In one immediate abrupt instant, he was pushed beyond the Veil into the land beyond. Once finally there, I don't think there is any coming back; at least not the way we and Harry hoped he would come back. Even thought I say he is not coming back, I don't believe the story of Sirius Black has been completely told, and I am confident that he will enter the story again before it's end. He just won't come back in any immediate form. Just a thought. bboy_mn From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 5 23:03:45 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 18:03:45 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione's summer Message-ID: <113.2b05dc17.2cdadbd1@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84174 Hello eclipse021342 at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? I don't have my books on me, but is there any mention ? about why Hermione is already at 12 Grimmauld Place. ? I got the impression that she had been there for a ? while. Was there some reason that she couldn't have ? stayed with her parents? If she was in danger, won't ? her parents still be without her there? You know. This has been troubling me as well. Well, not this exact question, but at the end of GoF, I was under the impression that Hermione was going to Holiday in Bulgaria with Viktor. Certainly, things change, but it is not clear whether Hermione awayed to Grimmauld place immdiately-- in fact, I don't remember an exact time that the house was taken over by the Order being mentioned in canon, but I could be mistaken. I find the lack of information on Hermione's life outside ofGrimmauld Place and Hogwarts a little odd. She writes to Krum during the fifth year, but did she ever actually go? Harry never asks and Ron and Hermione never mention anything. As far as Hermione and her parents, I am convinced that her parents do not know her real where abouts. In OoP when she arrives at Grimmauld Place after Arthur's accident she comments that she told her parents many students were staying behind to study for OWLs. She does not say that she informed her parents that Ron's father was in hospital because of an accident and she was going to stay with the Weasleys. I think Hermione's parents are in the dark. This is probably on DD's orders as they *are* muggles. However, it makes me wonder exactly how the relationships between the magical community and magical schools work with muggle parents of wizards and witches. I would think, as Hermione's life has been in danger a few times, thus far, that DD would have informed her parents about what has been happening in the Wizarding World. But, it doesn' appear so in canon. So, to me, there are many questions. I realise that there is sufficient evidence to support the argument that Hermione MAY indeed have gone to visit Viktor, but that because of the tension and 'eye rolling' she endures when his name is mentioned has thought better of it, but what about her parents knowing where she is? -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 5 23:07:24 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 18:07:24 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] First name adressing = same House? + Snape the Vampire (y... Message-ID: <14a.265825ce.2cdadcac@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84175 Hello Elvishooked at hotmail.com, In reference to your comment: ? "Harry had never met a vampire, but he had seen ? pictures of them in his Defence Against the Dark Arts ? classes, and Black looked just like one." I never ? thought of Black as a possible Vampire but as the ? describtion of him reminded me of Snape I (once ? again) got to think that there must be something there ? :-) Gosh. I remember discussing this topic a long time ago. If you search it, there are probably countless posts. ( Iremember because I was vehemently against this concept as a Serious Sirius Supporter) I think if you really look at Canon there is nothing that really supports the idea. Sirius was gaunt and greasey because of his 12 long years in Azkaban.... but check postings from around last April- I think. -Tonks From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 5 23:19:45 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 18:19:45 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sir Nick and Sirius Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84176 Hello vam0609 at aol.com, In reference to your comment: ? Sir Nick immidiately said "No, he's not coming back"(I ? don't have the book with me so I'm not sure if this is ? the exact quote) and then he explained why he(Nick) ? came back and why other dead wizards don't. My ? point is how does he know that Sirius will not be ? coming back? Is it because he knows Sirius was ? somebody brave when he was still at school? Or did ? he already meet and talk to Sirius from the Great ? Beyond? If that's the case then Harry can use Nick to ? communicate with his parents or Sirius and vice versa. ? Imagine all the possibilities. If you go back and reread this passage, you will also see that Nick also states ( paraphrased) that he doesn't know anything that comes after death as he never got that far. i would assume that Nick, having been dead when Sirius was alive and a young student, would know that Sirius would NOT be afraid of death. Nick tells Harry that he remained to walk in the shadow of his former life because he was afraid of death ( again paraphrased). Nick probably had already heard what had happened to Sirius by the time Harry caught up to him the night of the feast. I hardly doubt it was uncommon knowledge among the school ghosts and portraits by that time. ( Remember some time had elapsed between this meeting and the death of Sirius itself.) Nick was expecting Harry to come to him because he has had students come to him in the past when they had suffered losses. Nick most likely knew that Sirius was the most important person in Harry's life. After all, I have a sneaking suspicion that the portraits and ghosts of Hogwarts know FAR more about EVERYTHING than they ever let on to others. Nick makes it pretty clear that where Sirius has gone, and I would assume Harry's parents had gone, was a place he cannot travel to or communicate with because of the choices he made. I do not know if this means we will never hear from them again; I certainly hope that is not the case, but Nick, I think is not the way this will ever be facilitated. -Tonks From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 5 23:24:01 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 18:24:01 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Hermione and a Boggart in a Trunk? Message-ID: <1f0.12b03128.2cdae091@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84177 Hello bboy_mn at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? I think the boggart changing to whisps of dark smoke ? before vanishing completely, give us a clue to it natural ? form. However, Lupin does say that no one knows for ? sure. So, my most likely explaination for Moody's ? confidence is that he looked the desk and didn't see ? anything else he could identify, and by process of ? elimination that only left a bogart. Just a thought. Do you think it might be possible that when Moody's magical eye rests upon the boggart it takes it's form for Moody? Since no one knows exactly what a boggart looks like when it is alone as it changes form as soon as someone sees it, is it possible that it could feel Moody's eye and transform? Certainly Moody would have dealt with Boggarts before, thus he would know what shape/form it would take for him, and seeing that form, the boggart's existence would be confirmed? Just my thought -Tonks From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Thu Nov 6 02:33:33 2003 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (Blair) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 02:33:33 -0000 Subject: Sir Nick and Sirius/Plea for help about Lily's Name Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84178 Yes, I know this has been discussed time and time again. I'm doing a project for my English class and I cannot find any of the posts on Lily's name! (Every time I get close, Yahoomort tells me the list is temporarily unavailable...). If anyone could mail me with the post numbers (offlist, of course), I'd appreciate it. To keep this on topic (so as not to anger the List Elves), I think that Sir Nick knows that Sirius will not return as a ghost because Sir Nick knew the Marauders in school. He knows that Sirius would've wanted to die fighting and that saving Harry was high on his list. Of course, there's also the possibility that those who go through the Veil are not given the option to come back as ghosts.... Oryomai From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 5 23:38:00 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 18:38:00 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape:Voldemort's faithful servant ? (again) Message-ID: <184.22a69f2b.2cdae3d8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84179 Hello justcarol67 at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? > > And about the presence/absence of Snape in ? the graveyard...All the > Deatheaters APPARATED ? in the graveyard. These events take place > during ? the tournament,and all the teachers are at Hogwarts. ? What if > Snape had been called by Voldy but ? COULDN'T join them because YOU > CANNOT ? APPARATE in Hogwarts (this is repeated in almost in ? every > book,must be important,no?) > > I Now Me: Snape was 'called' as you say. When the mark burns, Voldemort is calling his faithful Death Eaters, but it is true that Snape could not have immediately apparated to the graveyard. However, if you take into account the fact that Snape *could* have traipsed his bottom out of the Hogwarts grounds and into Hogsmeade and then apparated to the Graveyard, but he still remained steadfast in Hogwarts, it seems that he didn't wish to go. DD trusts him, remember? And, after Harry returns to Hogwarts with Ced's body, DD asks Snape to take up his old post- which was as spy. I really don't think that Snape is a big baddie. Misunderstood, yes. (snip) Hi! This looks like as good a place as any ? for me to jump in. I know there's a post on this list ? stating that Rowling herself confirmed what to me is ? obvious: the coward is Karkaroff, the "faithful servant" is ? Barty Crouch, Jr., and the one whom Voldemort ? believes (I hope correctly) will not return is Snape. (We ? don't need to believe LV's statement that "he will be ? killed," which is of course only a statement of his ? intentions and not a prophesy.) (snip again) I get the impression in OoP that Snape has taken his place again as spy with all his comings and goings and reports to the Order. My theory is that he managed to explain to Voldemort that he *could* not leave his post at Hogwarts without people guessing what he was up to. I think that at that time, Voldemort did not want anyone but his DEs to know of his return, so he might think Snape wise in not joining the fellow DEs and thus not calling attention to Voldemort. There are countless explanations that Snape could have giving Voldemort. this would explain why snape is still breathing. ;) (snip again) For the record, I ? like Snape because he's mysterious and ? complex--sinister yet not wholly evil, severe to his ? students but highly intelligent and gifted, thwarted in ? his ambitions and abused in his childhood yet no ? longer a Death Eater. (snip) YAY! Another Snape lover! We had some very good posts in the spring about Snape and his possible past that were confirmed with OoP for the most part. And, I agree with you, although I think I snipped it, No one who is not innately evil would like Umbridge! So more points for Snape! -Tonks From delphislash at yahoo.ca Thu Nov 6 01:17:34 2003 From: delphislash at yahoo.ca (delphislash) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 01:17:34 -0000 Subject: First name adressing = same House? + Snape the Vampire (yes, again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84180 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" > wrote: > > There was some talk recently that James and Lily might not have > been > > in the same House at Hogwarts since they adressed each other by > their > > last names. This could also be evidence of Lily being on the quidditch team. A great deal of school-aged sports players become known more by their last names, and at the schools I attended, it was generally only polite to call a girl by her last name if this was the case. Just a thought. -Delphi From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Thu Nov 6 01:29:32 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 20:29:32 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First name adressing = same House? + Snape the Vampir... Message-ID: <126.33c5c321.2cdafdfc@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84181 Hello meriaugust at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? Just because people are in the same house doesn't ? mean that they refer to each other solely by their first ? names. Malfoy refers to Crabbe and Goyle exclusively ? by their last names and they are probably the closest ? friends he has. It just seems to be a matter of ? preference, depending on how well you know or like a ? particular person, whether you call them by their first ? or last names, regardless of house. This is very befitting to the scene in question from Snape's memories. At the time of the memory, James is a cocky, swelled head fifteen year old. He probably thinks he is sexy to call girls by their surnames, and Lily obviously doesn't care much for James. But, as soon as Snape calls Lily, a 'mudblood', Lily adopts the nickname that James and company use for him- Snivellus. And, although she probably still harbours some disgust for James, I would think she might in a way understand why he would be tormenting someone who would use such a foul word. Poor Snivelly, he just couldn't catch a break. -Tonks From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Thu Nov 6 02:46:18 2003 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 02:46:18 -0000 Subject: Sir Nick and Sirius/Plea for help about Lily's Name In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84182 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Blair" wrote: <> I don't recall reading in OotP that Sir Nick was ever told about Sirius' name being cleared after the flight from Azkaban? So how could Sir Nick know that Sirius would suddenly want to save Harry? Maybe I should read the book a 4th time :-) Inge From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Thu Nov 6 02:55:58 2003 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 21:55:58 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sir Nick and Sirius/Plea for help about Lily's Name Message-ID: <2FD744A1.16844877.4B073798@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84183 Would Nick really have to have been told the name "on-screen"? He could have heard from the portraits or the other ghosts. At the very least, someone would've told Nick after the Battle at the MoM so Nick would be ready when Harry came to talk to him. (Nick says that this is very common, so DD could easily assume he knew it.) Perhaps he didn't know anything about Sirius. I was only trying to keep the post on-topic for the List Elves! I really only cared about Lily's name... Oryomai --Who is being very defensive today...boy problems.... From cathio2002 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 03:28:29 2003 From: cathio2002 at yahoo.com (Buttercup) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 19:28:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sir Nick and Sirius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031106032829.34990.qmail@web21005.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84184 vampire1 wrote: My point is how does he (Sir Nick) know that Sirius will > not be coming > back? Is it because he knows Sirius was somebody > brave when he was > still at school? Or did he already meet and talk to > Sirius from the > Great Beyond? If that's the case then Harry can use > Nick to > communicate with his parents or Sirius and vice > versa. Imagine all > the possibilities. > Buttercup: I think he knew Sirius from his school days. Sirius was popular and smart, so I'm sure he was well-known. Perhaps ghosts tend to be the cowardice type, who are afraid to let go of their past lives, thus remaining on earth. And I think Sirius was far from being a coward. ===== Buttercup __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 03:39:07 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 03:39:07 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84185 Kneasy and Pippin again, eh? Okay, here goes: Laura said: A sentimental streak-how sweet! Kneasy: > No, it's an analytical streak. > Dissecting characters is part of the game and I was doing just that as a corrective to those rubbishing Molly because she did not comply with prevailing prejudices of what was fashionable behaviour in the circumstances that prevailed. > > Laura responds: Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much. This charming defense of motherhood is more than character analysis (which you called "post-facto rationalization) in another post, I believe). I don't recall anyone, including myself, saying that Molly doesn't fit some feminist stereotype and therefore is a bad person. > > Laura: > > The stereotype you describe has good and bad traits, imo. Some of the good traits become bad when taken to extremes. It is *not* cute, loving or desirable to treat your grown children as emotionally dependent all their lives. > Kneasy: > Taking any behaviour to extremes is counter- productive. As to having good and bad points, show me a perfect child-rearing system applicable to all children, all parents, in all circumstances. And who said anything about cute? Escaping the all-enveloping embrace > of your mum was a rite of passage necessary to achieve adulthood. > It's not the children who end up emotionally dependent, it's the mother. Molly worrying about things like Bill's hair shows Molly's emotional attachment, not Bill's. I don't consider this to be an undesirable trait, more a natural maternal effect; then again I haven't read the latest trendy parenting manuals so I may be out of date. > >Laura responds: Of course, there isn't a perfect child-rearing system. So the fact that Molly treats all of her children exactly the same way should make you wonder. They're hardly all the same sort of people. Your mom doesn't have to be "all-enveloping" for you to want independence. Most kids want it regardless, from both mother and father (if they're lucky enough to have both). Yes, exactly-it's Molly's attachment that isn't healthy. No, it's not a natural maternal effect, whatever that is. It's Molly. Can't help you on the parenting manuals question, I'm afraid. But the ones I read back in the day all agreed that the parent's job is to enable the child to achieve independence. Adult children and parents should have a loving and close relationship, if possible, but not a dependent one. Laura: Women who are mothers, even full time mothers (like me) have to have some sort of independent emotional and/or intellectual lives to be healthy and balanced human beings. > Kneasy: > I don't question your right to choice, I do dispute your contention that yours is the only correct choice for all women and that non-compliance signifies irredeemable descent into vegetablehood. I was under the impression that the feminist agenda was about expanding choice rather than imposing a new rigid orthodoxy. Offering a choice is not compatible with imposing a dictat. Or am I wrong? > Laura responds: I don't want to get into this too deeply since it's kind of OT, but I will say that I wasn't trying to lay down rules or limit anyone's choices. And I really don't think I suggested that. Feminism is exactly as you describe it-a belief that women's choices should be respected. I was suggesting that the women I know who are at-home mothers benefit, as I have, from some degree of a life away from their kids. Even if it's a walk around the block by yourself or watching tv and knitting, all parents (including full-time dads) can use a bit of a break now and then. Until the Order came along, Molly didn't seem to have much happening in her life outside of her kids. Of course, for all I know, once Ginny left for school, she and Arthur spent every night learning techniques from the kama sutra and she spent all day brushing up on her DADA skills. > Laura: > > The notion that a woman would do nothing with her life but be a > > mother is a relatively new one to civilization. > Kneasy: > Is this how you see Molly? > Thinking about it, maybe it's true. > Seven kids, each of them totally dependent until they are, say, of > school age would take a fair chunk of years and commitment. But > if you want or end up with a family that large, what is the alternative? There is none. The home is it. Probably explains her fantasies about Lockhart. Laura responds: The snip you used from me above is a bit out of context. I was suggesting that women had other work to do in addition to their child-rearing duties, so that they didn't have time to do the sorts of things we do nowadays for our kids (even if they'd existed and were considered appropriate for kids who weren't aristcrats). No soccer teams, violin lessons, drama coaching-you know the drill. Yes, if you have a large family and you stay home with them, your time is going to be quite full for the years until they start going off to school in the daytime. Someone suggested elsewhere on the list that the Weasleys were probably home-schooled, which makes sense given their relative isolation and complete ignorance of all things muggle. So Molly was a very busy and no doubt very tired woman for many years. When we first meet her, she is down to only one at home, and that one has gotten past the age of complete physical dependence. She doesn't actually *need* to be a full-time parent any more. She chooses to be one. Which is a bit challenging if you don't have any kids at home, as happens the following year. Molly wants to keep doing her job the same way she always has even though its parameters have changed dramatically. Kneasy: > This new notion (in our world) is the result of low child mortality more than anything else. Near where I live (a country town) there is an old graveyard. The number of gravestones marking children under 5 out-numbers adults by 3:1. By that reckoning, a hundred years ago perhaps two of Molly's brood would have got to Hogwarts. That would have given her much more opportunity to engage in fun activities outside the family. Laura responds: Now you know perfectly well that I'm not suggesting that was a better alternative. It's not a question of fun activities, in or out of the family-it's a question of doing basic work to maintain a household. That would have to be done whether you had 2 kids or 12, and that work was highly labor-intensive. Yes, the reduction in child mortality in addition to improved birth control techniques have radically changed women's opportunities. That doesn't mean that mothering is a less worthy occupation than it ever was. Maybe it's more worthy, just because it can be a choice. > > Laura: > > The fierce instinct to protect the family from a hostile > > world is an ancient one, and was necessary to insure family > > survival, but to suggest that this level of insularity is still > > necessary is, I think, wrong. Kneasy: Consider, Molly *knows* it is a hostile world out there. Voldy is on the prowl again and he *kills*. He also has hidden allies. Her family is associated with Voldy's prime target. It's not insularity, it's fear. Laura responds: Yes, and how should you deal with fear? By gaining power over it. And the way people can do that in the WW is to learn what it will take to defeat LV and his DEs. Knowledge is power. Molly wants to deprive her kids of that. If you don't give your kids the tools they need to take care of themselves in the world, you've done them a grave (in this case, perhaps fatal) disservice. The evil doesn't go away because Mommy didn't tell you about it. Intellectually I understand why Molly acts as she does. But I couldn't do that to my kids. I'd want to give them whatever it would take for them to survive. > > Laura: > > My feeling about her, though, is that she's too invested in > > her role as mom and has nothing else to help her form an identity. That's why she goes overboard with her reactions sometimes. She seems threatened when Harry shows understandable and appropriate affection for Sirius. > Kneasy: > Oh, Molly has an identity, she is not a blank, a cipher. Identity is nothing to do with complying with an observers stereotype of what > she should be. Laura responds: I'm not sure what you mean by this. She isn't a cipher at all. We all understand exactly where she's coming from. What I'm saying is that she wants to keep her children dependent on her because she doesn't seem to see another alternative for herself. You always keep your protective feelings no matter how old your kids get. But you don't act the same way with a 15 year old as you do with a 15 month old, and you don't act the same way with a 25 year old as you do with a 15 year old. Kneasy: The traditional mum was not weak or ineffectual. An assault on the family and you have a tigress on your hands. Laura responds: Honey, you don't have to tell me-I have a Jewish mother. Kneasy: > Harry may need a father figure, but is Sirius it? > An escapee who has spent 90% of his adult life in goal, who was > indirectly responsible for the deaths of Harry's parents, who was > indirectly responsible for Harry being attacked by Dementors and > who comes from a family of supremacists? Laura responds: We'll have to agree to disagree about Sirius. But what's this about his being indirectly responsible for Harry being attacked by dementors? If you're talking about PoA, that's *really* stretching a point. Harry and company were vulnerable to the dementors because they were trying to rescue Buckbeak, which is why they were outside in the first place. Sirius was not in their plans that night. > Kneasy:> > Hmm. Must all books be considered in the light of feminism? > How boring that would be. As well as being totally inappropriate. > Half the population disregarded to please the other half. > Brainwash 'em early, is that the idea? Acceptable stereotypes > only, otherwise the crusade is threatened? Can't be very sure > of your ground if that's the case. Laura responds: No, I wasn't suggesting that at all, just commenting on what's out there in terms of analysis. It *would* be boring and inappropriate. I've also read essays that accuse JKR of not paying sufficient attention to post-colonial race relations in the UK or issues of economic justice. It all seems pretty silly to me-the woman wrote the books she wrote and not something else. No author has the responsibility to address all the burning questions of the day, for Pete's sake. Judging by what is discussed on this list, she's done a pretty good job of making us think about some real-life problems in a clever and attention-grabbing (not to say addictive) way.> Pippin: I see the WW as post-feminist in some ways. The women in the WW, in contrast to the men, all seem to know what they want and how to get it. There's an assumption, it seems to me, on the part of some feminist critics, that any woman who is not struggling desperately has given up. But what if they're simply on track to get what they want, and haven't got to struggle for anything? Laura: I'd agree, if by post-feminist you mean a society in which gender isn't a defining factor or an obstacle to anyone. JKR seems to want to show us a culture in which anyone can be anything they choose- sounds good to me! I don't know about feminist critics in the context you present, but anyone who goes through life without struggling (at least against one's own lesser instincts) isn't trying hard enough. If sex-role stereotypes aren't a problem in the WW, that's one less thing to struggle with. Pippin: Molly's offspring live in her world, not ours. We value independence from family, but in more traditional cultures the family has multi-generational responsibilities. It has to. The institutions that oversee cultural transmission and social support in our society, ie universities, organized religion, the welfare state, are either undeveloped or don't exist at all. Laura: I thought traditional societies were all pretty strong in their religious structures. I can't think of one offhand that wasn't. You raise an interesting point, though. How do values get transmitted in the WW? Maybe the lack of institutions to perform this function accounts for the ethical/moral weaknesses in the WW. Learning values from the Daily Prophet could be dangerous. Kids will pick up something at school but there's no explicit ethics of magic class, as we've observed before. Still, once the kids are at school, parents lose most of the opportunities to have the kind of day-to-day influence that they have when the kids are at home. Still, nagging grown men about their hair and jewelry preferences and making decisions based on what you read in a notoriously unreliable publication aren't exactly the values one might want to see passed along. Pippin: Just because JKR depicts a more traditional society doesn't mean that she's nostalgic for it. And while JKR's life story would make a good Danielle Steele novel, I don't see why JKR has to write it. Isn't the fact that she's lived it enough? Laura: Again, that wasn't my suggestion at all, and if I wasn't clear, I'll try to do better in the future. It was just an observation. I did go on to say: 'I don't think that we can take it as an endorsement of any particular societal model, though.' That's why they call it fiction, right? Authors who write thinly disguised autobiographical novels don't usually fool anyone. If JKR has an agenda in writing these books besides entertainment, it certainly isn't to tell us her own life story. Is there any such thing as a good Danielle Steele novel? *grins* Laura, who may not always agree with what Kneasy and Pippin have to say but respects their points of view and loves reading their posts! From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 03:58:06 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 03:58:06 -0000 Subject: First name adressing = same House? + Snape the Vampire (yes, again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84186 Inge wrote: > I wonder in which house Hagrid was back then - do we have any canon > to tell? > The reason I wonder is because in CoS (chapter 13) Tom Riddle and > Hagrid adress each other by first name: > > "'Evening, Rubeus,' said Riddle sharply. The boy slammed the door > shut and stood up. 'What yer doin' down here, Tom?'" > > Riddle and Hagrid were 2 years apart when they were at Hogwarts and > it seems a bit strange that they use first names (and this was in the > 40's when I assume that using last names was even more common between > people who didn't socialise with each other?) Annemehr: I'd never really paid any attention to that before, other than that it shows they were personally acquainted with each other. But you're quite right. Their use of first names suggests something much more than mere acquaintance. What if Hagrid actually thought they were *friends?* Then Riddle didn't just use him as a scapegoat, he betrayed him. Probably know all about that acromantula because Hagrid had told him all about it. And now he just carries on with how his life has turned out, never complaining, hardly a harsh word to say about anybody. I'll bet it turns out he's a lot deeper than any of us thought. And there's no way I think Hagrid could have been in Slytherin. He's just not the Slytherin type. It's just that Riddle was charming to people all over the school, in case he needed to make use of them. Annemehr From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 6 04:02:35 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 04:02:35 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84187 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says If he was a regular famous person in real life, of course we would; it would be big news if he was lying or wrong. Adolf Hitler, Madeleine Albright, Jack Nicholson, etc... In the case of Adolf Hitler, people are still arguing about whether or not he was part Jewish. In the latter two cases, the news about the mysteries in their parentage was gossip for a while, but since neither of them are mass murderers, nobody cares anymore. However, when you claim to be the most powerful Dark Wizard in the world and that you're justified in killing hundreds of innocent people and I paid 25 bucks for your latest adventure, I want to see some serious motivation. I was way pi--, I mean annoyed -- when the name that strikes terror into the hearts of wizards everywhere turned out to be an anagram (could that be more pre-teen?) and now he wants us to feel somthing because his mother was cruelly abandoned? See the chaplain, Private. Sounds like a personal problem to me. Now that Draco turns out to be an oxygen thief and a total waste of other natural resources and Harry isn't cute anymore, I see troubled times ahead for the franchise if Voldemort doesn't step up to the plate and get more interesting. --JDR From erinellii at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 04:14:38 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 04:14:38 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84188 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Pippin previously: > > > We don't know what Hermione wants for herself apart from > being a terrific student. I think that's part of the suspense. > What's going to happen if Hermione wants a life like her Muggle > mother has, but in the wizarding world. Will it be allowed? But say, pace Shippers, that Hermione wants to marry a > Weasley. Will St. Mungo's refuse to train her as a wizarding > dentist/healer because everybody knows that Weasley wives > have umpteen zillion children and no time for another career? If > she decides not to have umpteen zillion children, will she be > getting tiny easter eggs for the rest of Molly's life? Erin: Well... I just can't see the St. Mungo's thing, I really can't. I mean this is a society in which Alice Longbottom can be an auror during the uprising of the most dangerous dark wizard in a century, while she is pregnant and while she has a young baby. I think the WW is a lot less sexist than you're trying to make it out to be. My Dad used to repeat this old saying sometimes, "God made men and women, Smith and Wesson made them equal". Magic pretty much levels the playing field, wouldn't you say? And it's not a recent invention, it's something they've always had. I don't think there's too much wife-beating going on in the WW. Look at the founders of Hogwarts, however-many hundreds of years back. Half of them were female, so that should tell you something right there. No, if there is sexism in the WW, it would be imported from the contact they've had with muggles. As for the tiny easter eggs? Maybe. But you know, that wouldn't be wizarding culture, that would just be *Molly*. From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 6 04:28:18 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 04:28:18 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84189 <<>> Okay, now you're messing with me. Not to change the subject or anything, but what do you suppose they do with the living soulless husks after the Dementor has kissed them? Do they have to be fed, like Azkaban lifers? --JDR From happydogue at aol.com Thu Nov 6 04:50:22 2003 From: happydogue at aol.com (happydogue at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 23:50:22 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Knockturn Alley Message-ID: <196.22192a1e.2cdb2d0e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84190 I don't think they were allowed because there parents didn't want them there. It is a dark place. Look at how they tried to go after Harry. The Weasley parents are just being parents. Would you let your kid go the "bad" end of town just because they wanted to? JMM From Batchevra at aol.com Thu Nov 6 05:02:12 2003 From: Batchevra at aol.com (Batchevra at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 00:02:12 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin's Chocolate, WAS: Lupin's sense of humor (and a bun... Message-ID: <12d.33ef6675.2cdb2fd4@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84191 In a message dated 11/5/03 10:26:11 AM Eastern Standard Time, liz at studylink.com writes: > > Oh yeah. I think Lupin's appointment to the DA post this particular year is > definitely calculated by DD. DD wants him at Hogwarts because of any insight > he may offer in the Sirius area, and DD wanted him on the Express armed with > chocolate and a competent patronus just in case of any trouble with the > dementors. Why else is he there? No other teacher ever takes the Express. > > Also, with regards to Lupin's sense of humour, how about the chewing gum up > the nose incident with Peeves?? Priceless! > > Liz > > Lupin was on the Hogwart's Express because he was appointed as a teacher at the last moment, Lupin says in POA that Dumbledore had to work hard to convince some teachers that he was trustworthy. Also the fact that he had transformed the night before the term started. Why else did he sleep from 11 AM to about 7 PM on the train? Batchevra [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From erinellii at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 05:28:31 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 05:28:31 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84192 >The Sergeant Majorette says: > <<>> Okay, now you're > messing with me. Erin: Yeah, maybe a little bit :-) Fun, isn't it? > The Sergeant Majorette says > Oh, come on! How sane can a person be who plans and organizes an evil empire? The legal definition of insanity, the whole business of "not guilty by reason of mental defect" is a crock of what my sister refers to as "caca de vaca". Erin: Ok, now that is something I can disagree with. There are people who seriously don't have the mental capacity to understand that they've commited crimes. Tom Riddle is not one of those- on that we are agreed. So what is your definition of insanity, exactly? Just curious, would you say Hitler was insane? > The Sergeant Majorette says > Not to change the subject or anything, but what do you suppose they > do with the living soulless husks after the Dementor has kissed them? Do they have to be fed, like Azkaban lifers? Erin: That is what I think, that they live as vegetables pretty much. But I've seen people speculate on the list (sorry I don't remember who) that dementor victims become dementors themselves eventually- and that they are always searching for human emotions and souls to replace the ones they have lost. Oh, wait, I think there was canon to back that up. Something about if they are allowed, they will feed on you long enough to reduce you to something soul-less and evil like themselves. Too lazy to look it up right now, but Lupin said it in the third book, I'm pretty sure. Well, ok, if I'm not just making that up, I guess that means that without a soul, you are not just a vegetable- you are actively evil. So maybe I buy the turning into dementors thing after all. Erin- not sure what she thinks without more canon From jillily3g at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 05:38:38 2003 From: jillily3g at yahoo.com (Beth) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 05:38:38 -0000 Subject: What and how did Lupin know? (Was: Hermione's boggart , etc.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84193 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > Lupin asks Neville what his worst fear is, which he doesn't do for > the other students. I think Lupin is likely to know which of his > students are magically powerful (Neville is, though his powers > aren't under control) and may have vivid memories of terrifying > encounters (we still don't know if Neville witnessed the attack on > his family.) It's just speculation, but I think the power of the > victim may have something to do with the strength of the > apparition produced by the boggart, so that Lupin would have > reason to be extra cautious in dealing with Harry, Neville and > Hermione. Beth (late to the watercooler again!): Would Lupin's knowledge about Neville's potential be from something like the magic quill, Neville's "permanent record" from Hogwarts or from Lupin's being in the Order, supposing members knew that Neville could have been The One? Another thought: Harry's memory of what happened to his parents seems to grow stronger with repeated exposure to his boggart/dementor. Could Lupin's caution be due to the possibility that Neville *will* remember more if his boggart isn't dealt with quickly? > The argument that once Neville had named Snape as his worst > fear Lupin was obliged to use Snape for the demonstration is > weaker now that we've seen Molly's boggart take several > terrifying forms in succession. Neville himself anticipates being > asked to conjure something else as his worst fear, "I don't want > the boggart to turn into her either." > > Pippin Beth: Maybe it was just easier to use the fear he first named so Neville would have a clear picture and the boggart wouldn't be shifting and therefore harder to fight? I wonder how Neville would have had to picture his gran to make her funny... Beth From lkadlec at princeton.edu Thu Nov 6 06:05:41 2003 From: lkadlec at princeton.edu (curly_of_oster) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 06:05:41 -0000 Subject: What and how did Lupin know? (Was: Hermione's boggart , etc.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84194 Or, what could/should Lupin have done with Neville's boggart? Pippin wrote (some posts ago) The argument that once Neville had named Snape as his worst fear Lupin was obliged to use Snape for the demonstration is weaker now that we've seen Molly's boggart take several terrifying forms in succession. And Beth: Maybe it was just easier to use the fear he first named so Neville would have a clear picture and the boggart wouldn't be shifting and therefore harder to fight? Now me (Lisa): Or maybe Molly's worst fear was the death of *a* family member, not necessarily any specific family member. Given this possibility I don't think her situation necessarily speaks to the Neville/Remus/Snape issue at all. If Molly has a general fear of losing a child (or husband, I can't recall off the top of my head if there was a DeadArthur!Boggart as well), perhaps the boggart plays on that, and cycles through the various possibilities. Thus, it wouldn't be taking several forms because it's showing multiple *different* 'worst fears,' but rather because it's elaborating on a single, somewhat ill-defined fear. If so, we're right back to Snape being Neville's worst fear and the idea that once this is revealed, Lupin is pretty much obliged to help Neville deal with Boggart! Snape. I'm not suggesting, btw, that Lupin wouldn't have *enjoyed* seeing Snape made funny, but that doesn't mean that he set out to mock Snape in the first place. Lisa From liwy_500 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 22:26:41 2003 From: liwy_500 at yahoo.com (LIWY) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 22:26:41 -0000 Subject: Hermione's summer In-Reply-To: <20031105203136.18946.qmail@web80710.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84195 Eclipse wrote: > I don't have my books on me, but is there any mention about why Hermione is already at 12 Grimmauld Place? I got the impression that she had been there for a while. >> Simple-she wanted to be there. Also she probably felt safer. "LIWY" From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 5 23:52:45 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 23:52:45 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups]The Burrow In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84196 Just for information, I have posted some data on UK road classification on OT-Chatter. Geoff From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 5 23:54:44 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 23:54:44 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84197 Geoff wrote: > Tom has just revealed to Harry that he is Lord Voldemort. > He could have said no more. But he goes on and I suspect > his anger is beginning to come out... > > "I, keep the name of a foul, common Muggle who abandoned me even > before I was born, just because he found out his wife was a witch? > No, Harry, I fashioned myself a new name, a name I knew wizards > everywhere would one day fear to speak..." > > He didn't have to say the first sentence above. The point about his > father being a Muggle had already been made. He could have gone > straight on to the last sentence above. If he was lying about his > parents being married, why bother to tell Harry when it wasn't his > intention that Harry was going to walk out of the Chamber alive? > Harry knows no other than what he has been told. I agree, but I think two additional points can be made. One, CS is, after all, primarily a children's book and Rowling is unlikely to introduce an illegitimate birth. Marriage before pregnancy can simply be taken for granted in these books. More important, Tom Riddle would not have his father's muggle last name if his parents hadn't been married. His last name would have been his (witch) mother's. And, wretch that he is, Tom would probably have been happier. Carol From HimemyaUtena at aol.com Wed Nov 5 23:57:49 2003 From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com) Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2003 18:57:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP: movie contamination Message-ID: <2F16AE0A.677AF363.1E595A1B@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84198 In a message dated 11/4/2003 10:22:03 PM Eastern Standard Time, bcbgx6 at yahoo.com writes: [Brian] > I was polling a couple of my students about their SHIPping > preferences. The thought occurred to me that my R/H SHIP > inclination, and SHIPping in general is a product of movie > contamination. Romantic prospects don't seem as salient in the > books. Steve Kloves is an obvious R/H-er and I think his > presentation of those characters has changed the way I read them in > Rowling's books. Character interaction in books one and > two seems > more matter-of-fact than the movie representations. I'm inclined to agree. I was convinced of an R+H ship for ages. But the more I go back and reread the books, especially OOTP, the more I'm inclined to believe H+H. I don't think Ron and Hermione would make a very good couple and I was struck by this the most in a re-read of POA and OOTP. Ron is always making fun of Hermione and the things she cares about. Like SPEW. Harry makes fun a bit too, but not as much, and not so much to her face. Also, he doesn't tell Hermione that Dobby is the one taking all of her clothes, because her clothes making makes her happy and he doesn't want to hurt her feelings. I haven't really formed any hard core arguements about any ships, but I'm inclined towards H+H. Adrianna From nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 02:09:22 2003 From: nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com (nkittyhawk97) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 02:09:22 -0000 Subject: About Neville's parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84199 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "moorequests" wrote: > When Neville's mom approaches him and gives him the Droobles bubble > gum wrapper, his grandmother mentions that she's given him thousands, > and Neville takes it and puts it in his pocket. Is this just > significant that Mrs. Longbottom has lost her mind, or do you think > she's trying to say something to Neville? nkittyhawk: yeah... I thought that was a bit... I don't know... disruptive of the scene. Almost as if it had been inserted there *wink wink* for reasons JKR isn't going to reveal until later. Maybe she is trying to say something to us (the readers) as well as Alice saying something to her son. Of course, being crazy and all, it would be a bit difficult to tell him coherently and directly. From nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 02:03:47 2003 From: nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com (nkittyhawk97) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 02:03:47 -0000 Subject: Why's the Bloody Baron so bloody? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84200 If I'm not mistaken, someone asked that very question in SS/PS. Let's see... "How did he get covered in blood?" asked Seamus with great interest. "I've never asked," said Nearly Headless Nick delicately. (pg 124 US version) Well, we all know that contention between Slytherins and Gryffindors is nothing new. What if the Soon-to-be-nearly-headless Sir Nicholas de Mimsy Porpington got into a bit of a *dispute* (to be worded lightly) with the soon-to-be-bloody Baron, and the Baron didn't manage to completely sever Nick's head, because Nick was killing him at the same time. Icky, I know. Obviously, even now, after 500 years, and after becoming the best of friends (as ghosts) it would be a touchy subject for them to... er... discuss openly with ickle first years. I know that's the only evidence I have... but anyhoo... thoughts? "nkittyhawk97" From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Thu Nov 6 04:22:34 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 23:22:34 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) Message-ID: <10f.2837c969.2cdb268a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84201 jdr0918 at hotmail.com writes: (snip) > and now he wants us to feel something ? because his mother was cruelly abandoned? See the ? chaplain, Private. Sounds like a personal problem to ? me. Now that Draco turns out to be an oxygen thief ? and a total waste of other natural resources and Harry ? isn't cute anymore, I see troubled times ahead for the ? franchise if Voldemort doesn't step up to the plate and ? get more interesting. (snip) I don't think that Voldemort's comments about his mum are there to make us feel sorry for him. This is just history into the man and why he became what he did. Just as we discuss Snape and Draco's childhoods, this is a brief glimpse into Voldemort's. It also helps us to see some of the origins of his Muggle-hating ideals. There has to be more to Voldemort's story. Every book gives a little more on the backgrounds of others. I think book six will open our eyes more to the powers and reasonings of the Dark Lord. I, as a lot of people, have always thought that he mirrored Hitler in many ways. I hope this isn't true. I hope he is original. As for Draco, as soon as he comes of age, I think he will be a lot more interesting. ( Get your minds out of the gutters ;) ) I think that he is holding back because he is still under the influence of his parents and the watchful eye of the staff. Bring it on Draco! I want to see Draco lose his mind and inflict his insanity on everyone. ;) -Tonks From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 04:32:38 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 04:32:38 -0000 Subject: Draco's future (wasTom Riddle's Origins) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84202 JDR wrote: > Now that Draco turns out to be an oxygen thief and a total waste of > other natural resources and Harry isn't cute anymore, I see troubled > times ahead for the franchise if Voldemort doesn't step up to the > plate and get more interesting. Interesting reaction to Draco. He has been rather disappointing, I confess. I'm guessing that he'll become more dangerous (and consequently more interesting) now that his father is in Azkaban. (He'll blame it entirely on Harry and company, not on Lucius' own evil doings.) Crabbe (though he'll still be a stupid thug) will have a similar motivation. But (maybe you've discussed this before) did anyone notice that Goyle (Sr.) wasn't present in the MoM? Was this just an oversight? Or maybe he was the one whose head was caught in the time warp and kept transforming back to babyhood? Carol From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Thu Nov 6 04:35:22 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 23:35:22 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione, St. Mungo's and women- was Re: I know Molly..... Message-ID: <5b.413057d9.2cdb298a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84203 Hello erinellii at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? Well... I just can't see the St. Mungo's thing, I really ? can't. I mean this is a society in which Alice ? Longbottom can be an auror during the uprising of the ? most dangerous dark wizard in a century, while she is ? pregnant and while she has a young baby. We don't know that Alice Longbottom was working during her pregnancy. Albeit, the WW seems a bit more progressive in equality of the sexes than the Muggle World was/is (in some instance). However, I hardly doubt that Alice Longbottom would have stood and fought against Voldemort with child. (Anyone have any ideas on how curses and hexes affect unborn children? ) But, I think it is for certain that women in the WW have a lot more freedom with what they do. Although, educators are often seen as women, there is evidence in canon to suggest that women have played a long time role in all areas. As for what Hermione will do, as Lupin would say, 'Anything, She is clever!'. I don't put much hope in her working for St. Mungo's and I do agree that it is a place we should watch carefully for safety purposes; however, if she did work there, I think it would be more in the reversal of dangerous spells or something that would 'fascinate' her. (She already has probably learned from Madame Pompfrey all there is about magical dentistry.) I would hope, were she to live through the books, that Hermione would become an Auror. She and Tonks seem to get on rightly, and Tonks may prove an influence. (Remember, Tonks is closest to the Trio's age group, female, and a bit funny.) -Tonks From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Thu Nov 6 04:41:12 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 23:41:12 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] How are we going to Kill Voldemort? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84204 ? << Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84205 > I think the WW is a lot less sexist than you're trying to make it > out to be. My Dad used to repeat this old saying sometimes, "God > made men and women, Smith and Wesson made them equal". Magic pretty > much levels the playing field, wouldn't you say? And it's not a > recent invention, it's something they've always had. I don't think > there's too much wife-beating going on in the WW. Look at the > founders of Hogwarts, however-many hundreds of years back. Half of > them were female, so that should tell you something right there. No, > if there is sexism in the WW, it would be imported from the contact > they've had with muggles. I agree with most of what you've said. There does seem to be very little sexism in the working portion of the WW (and Molly's decision to be a stay-at-home mom with lots of kids is her own choice). But it appears from Harry's glimpse of Snape's memories in the Pensieve that Severus's father was extremely abusive and both his wife and his little son were terrified of him. That's an individual instance of a man dominating a woman and a child, I realize, but it has nothing to do with the influence of the muggle world. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 05:47:03 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 05:47:03 -0000 Subject: Neville's boggart (Was: Hermione's boggart , etc.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84206 > Beth: > Maybe it was just easier to use the fear he first named so > Neville would have a clear picture and the boggart wouldn't > be shifting and therefore harder to fight? I wonder how > Neville would have had to picture his gran to make her funny... Dress her as Snape? Carol From darkthirty at shaw.ca Thu Nov 6 09:41:44 2003 From: darkthirty at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 09:41:44 -0000 Subject: Why is everyone afraid of Luna? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84207 I don't mean, of course, in the books, though some of the ostracism she experiences could be attributed to fear of her, or what she represents, on the part of other characters, at bottom. No, I mean on this list. Absent for a couple months, I did a search and found very, very few references to her at all. My own old posts showed up right away. I have some speculations, naturally, as to why Lovegood isn't much speculated on, but I want to ask people on the list a couple things before I go too far in that direction. Why was Luna introduced? Why was she given the moment at the end of OOP with Potter? dan From mainecoon at wytopitlock.dk Thu Nov 6 11:01:10 2003 From: mainecoon at wytopitlock.dk (mainecoon at wytopitlock.dk) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 11:01:10 CET Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is everyone afraid of Luna? Message-ID: <200311061101556.SM01016@Debug> No: HPFGUIDX 84208 Hi List > Why was Luna introduced? > Why was she given the moment at the end of OOP with Potter? There can be lots of reasons, but we know that Harry has problems sharing his inner feelings and thoughts with Ron and Hermoine - or anyone else except from Sirius... Now Sirius is gone. I think Luna is introduced and given the moment with Harry to show us that he actually is able to share feelings. And maybe he feels threatened by the stronger relationship between Ron and Hermione. In some way Ron and Hermoine understand each other. Luna and Harry is equal in beeing something special and beeing alone with thoughts and feelings they don't dare share with other. Anette -- Anette Becker Wytopitlock Maine Coon Cats www.wytopitlock.dk mainecoon at wytopitlock.dk From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk Thu Nov 6 11:12:21 2003 From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 11:12:21 -0000 Subject: First name adressing = same House? + Snape the Vampire (yes, again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84209 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "delphislash" wrote: > > This could also be evidence of Lily being on the quidditch team. A > great deal of school-aged sports players become known more by their > last names, and at the schools I attended, it was generally only > polite to call a girl by her last name if this was the case. > > Just a thought. > > -Delphi To my mind, and as an inhabitant of the same kind of school culture as this, it was common for people to address each other by surname only. The use of Christian names tended to be as follows: 1. Among girls. 2. Between boys who were close friends, but usually NOT if someone else was present. 3. During particular moments where the use of christian names was more appropriate. In the scene between Tom and Hagrid, Tom is ostensibly (though we know his true motivation is otherwise) behaving in a "head-boy" almost avuncular or elder brother manner towards Hagrid. They are alone too, I suspect it would be different if anyone else was there at that time. My school was a fairly traditional grammar school - this was the kind of school that you did not pay fees to get into, but passed into on merit following an exam. To my way of thinking, JKR has carefully blended elements of the top two tiers of the older English System of education where the first tier was the English Public Boarding school (eg Eton, Winchester - famous schools) and the second tier was the Grammar school for academically abler pupils, generally these were day schools. Hogwarts lacks a good deal of the snobbery prevalent in the Public school system (though it is still there - see Malfoy). My school had houses too, though they were largely sporting competitions. Certainly, going back to use of first or surnames, this I do remember. No male fellow pupil would have risked calling a same-age female by her first name for fear of being mercilessly ragged for fancying her, or her being his girlfriend. For some reason, we all got on first name terms in the sixth year but not before. Don't know why. As James DOES fancy Lily, he is probably at pains NOT to draw attention to the fact and that is his prime motivator for calling her Evans. He does in fact ask her out in the Penseive scene but I think he is covering up his real feelings by making the whole exchange seem jocular - there is a very adolescent forced heartiness in his manner that I remember only too well. "I'll put him down if you go out with me" (or words to that effect). He means it. But he's pretending he doesn't - so he can keep face in front of Sirius and the others. June From liz at studylink.com Thu Nov 6 09:46:58 2003 From: liz at studylink.com (liz) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 10:46:58 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin's Chocolate, WAS: Lupin's sense of humor (and a bun... In-Reply-To: <12d.33ef6675.2cdb2fd4@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84210 Liz (me) wrote: >> Oh yeah. I think Lupin's appointment to the DA post this particular year is >> definitely calculated by DD. DD wants him at Hogwarts because of any insight >> he may offer in the Sirius area, and DD wanted him on the Express armed with >> chocolate and a competent patronus just in case of any trouble with the >> dementors. Why else is he there? No other teacher ever takes the Express. >> Batchvera replied: > Lupin was on the Hogwart's Express because he was appointed as a teacher at > the last moment, Lupin says in POA that Dumbledore had to work hard to > convince > some teachers that he was trustworthy. Also the fact that he had transformed > the night before the term started. Why else did he sleep from 11 AM to about 7 > PM on the train? How would the fact that he had transformed the night before mean that he had to take the Express? I agree he probably did recently because he was so tired, but I don't think having to travel to Kings Cross, then sleeping in an awkward position for 8 hours on a train with a lot of rowdy kids would be easier for him than flooing into DD's office or apparating to Hogsmede and spending the day in bed at Hogwarts. I don't think being appointed at the last minute would make either of these options unworkable either. On the other hand, maybe he can't afford floo powder, and apparating takes more concentration than he can manage in his exhausted state. Still, he did have the chocolate. But maybe he's just a chocolate nut (as many fic authors like to believe) and having it is yet another happy coincidence. Canon hasn't told us for sure, so I guess we'll never know. Maybe he just wanted to take the train to get an early gander at Harry. Liz From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Thu Nov 6 13:32:08 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 08:32:08 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups]Draco's future (was Tom Riddle's Origins) References: <10f.2837c969.2cdb268a@aol.com> Message-ID: <000c01c3a46a$606694d0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 84212 Tonks said: As for Draco, as soon as he comes of age, I think he will be a lot more interesting. ( Get your minds out of the gutters ;) ) I think that he is holding back because he is still under the influence of his parents and the watchful eye of the staff. Bring it on Draco! I want to see Draco lose his mind and inflict his insanity on everyone. ;) Joj says: I think we're definitely going to get bad-ass Draco in book 6. It's been childish bullying up to this point. Draco's never had a real personal reason to hate Harry before. There was the snub in PS/SS, but that really wasn't that big a deal. Then in book 5 we get this: pg. 851 American edition " he looked back at Harry and said in a low voice, "You're dead, Potter" " snip " Malfoy looked angrier than Harry had ever seen him. " snip " "You're going to pay, said Malfoy in a voice barely louder than a whisper. I'm going to make you pay for what you've done to my father..." " This is going to be a whole lot worse than making Potter stinks badges. In fact, he seemed to move on to Ron in OoP, because he got a kick out of all that bullying . Now it's going to be about revenge, not kicks. He has a real, personal reason to hate Harry now. Also, lets not forget how strongly he feels about Hermione's Mudbloodesness (is that a word?!) I've been waiting for him to do something to her since book 2. He knows hurting Hermione would hurt Harry. Draco can do some serious damage, I have no doubt. Joj "Junk is something you've kept for years and throw away three weeks before you need it." [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Thu Nov 6 13:40:25 2003 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 13:40:25 -0000 Subject: Azkaboon: Finale (filks) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84213 The finale of the Azkaboon musical, consisting of three filks ? dedicated to all those listees who have proved that Hogwarts is in Scotland! Turn Back the Clock (PoA, Chap. 21) To the tune of Down in MacConnachy Square (this song is not reprised in the original, so I take a liberty in doing so here) Hear a MIDI at: http://www.hamienet.com/cat228.html THE SCENE: Pomfrey's infirmary. With the Time-Turner, HARRY & HERMIONE have traveled three hours back to rescue Black & Buckbeak HERMIONE: I've turned back the clock! Reversed its tick-tock! For to help me learn This Time-Turn I had earned. Once more Nine at night! Keep ye out of sight! Three hours we've gone back: We've returned We're on track To save both Buckbeak and Black HARRY: Now we will make off for Hagrid's hut Poor Bucky they'd terminate We'll save him from the stern axeman's cut, That `griff we will liberate. HERMIONE: And then with the hippogriff in tow We'll go to free Black to boot Right to the West Tower we will go So Bucky and Black can scoot (Segue to HARRY standing on the opposite lakeshore, watching himself surrounded by dementors) HARRY II (watching from across the shore): Dementors attacked! Something drove them back I think that it had To have been Dear old dad Hey, where are ye, dad? Come and save your lad! Dad, your son restore! HARRY I (facing the dementors) Oh comfort there is none I cannot run! Oh come and rescue James' son! Oh help me people, Help me, I implore! HARRY I & II Come again Declare war On those fiendish dementors HARRY II Suddenly this thought I got It was not daddy HARRY I I'm trapped in here! HARRY Suddenly I plainly see It was me, Harry! EXPECTO P! HARRY & PRONGS: EXPECTO P! Dementors, flee! Out the door! HARRY It was I myself that I was spyin' A time-travel paradox And all because Hermy turned the time I cleaned those dementors' clocks. In using the spell that Lupin taught I knew I could not go wrong A bonnie fair Patron bravely fought That looks like my father Prongs (Segue to the West Tower. HARRY & HERMIONE, on Buckbeak's back, rescue SIRIUS) HARRY & HERMIONE (simultaneous with below) You who are locked inside the tower Who go by the name of Black For thanks to a gift of chronic power Do your disappearing act! The two of ye must be leavin' soon For Snapey and Fudge are nigh The hippo is better than a broom When what ye must do is fly! Your soul has been saved! Our goodbyes we wave! BLACK: (simultaneous with above) Come ye with the `griff! No ands buts or ifs! I'll not be undone! Truly you're James' son. Tis better than a broom, Skywards we'll loom! The hippo's ready now to zoom Oh farewell Hogwarts (BLACK soars off on Buckbeak, HARRY & HERMIONE wave their goodbyes) HARRY & HERMIONE: Three hours we went back We time-turned With impact To free both Bucky and Black! II. Once Here at Hogwarts (to the tune of Once on This Island ? reprise) CHORUS OF DEMENTORS (off camera, singing as if from a great distance) Once here at Hogwarts, one summer at Hogwarts To be specific, in Volume Three Right here at Hogwarts, this summer at Hogwarts Two wizards set each other free (On camera, we see DUMBLEDORE, FUDGE, SNAPE enter Flitwick's office. FUDGE & SNAPE fly into an astonished rage when they find it empty, as DUMBLEDORE observes them wryly) You saw how it happened, You saw just how it happened, How this man and boy became family III. Brink of Doom (to the title tune of Brigadoon) (Cut to HARRY & HERMIONE, on the castle embattlements, gazing skywards) HARRY: Brink of doom, brink of doom HERMIONE: On your precipice we stood RON: (at Pomfrey's infirmary, looking out the window) Give us room, give us room DUMBLEDORE (looking out from Flitwick's office) To fight evil and strive for good HAGRID (in front of his cabin, gazing skywards) May our feet stay firmly grounded MOONY (deep in the Forbidden Forest, gazing skywards) As our souls through the sky soar THE PATRONUS (in the shape of Prongs, gazing skywards) Brink of doom, brink of doom WORMTAIL (deep in the Forbidden Forest, gazing skywards) As I bring you to the brink of war (The camera pans skyward until we see Sirius and Buckbeak flying before the full moon then disappearing into a cloud with the final crescendo.) - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Thu Nov 6 13:53:07 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 08:53:07 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP: movie contamination Message-ID: <001d01c3a46d$4eae1d50$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 84214 [Brian] > I was polling a couple of my students about their SHIPping > preferences. The thought occurred to me that my R/H SHIP > inclination, and SHIPping in general is a product of movie > contamination. Romantic prospects don't seem as salient in the > books. Steve Kloves is an obvious R/H-er and I think his > presentation of those characters has changed the way I read them in > Rowling's books. Character interaction in books one and > two seems > more matter-of-fact than the movie representations. Joj: I think the movie might have an impact on some people's perceptions of the R/H/H relationships, but only those who've not read the books , or only read them once. Any shipping moments you can pick out of the movie are different than what's in the books. Let's take that whole "hug" scene at the end of COS. That showed the difference between how Hermione feels about Harry(comfortable) and Ron(awkward). In canon, we do see Hermione hug Harry a couple times, (not in a full run, with hair flying, in front of the whole school type thing) so it's not to far off canon. What we don't see in canon, is Hermione's feelings being this clear. If the boys had run up to Hermione, and first Harry hugged her, and then Ron went to but pulled away, it would have been more in the spirit of the books. JKR has been very, very subtle with her shipping clues.( Frustratingly so) Chris Columbus is as subtle as the Titanic. That said, I don't think real fans of the book will be swayed by the movie. Before OoP, I thought R/H was going to happen. After, I became a huge H/H and nothing they might put in the POA movie this summer is going to change my mind! Joj "By the time you can make ends meet, they move the ends". From artcase at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 14:38:54 2003 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 14:38:54 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84216 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "slgazit" wrote: ...big snip for space... > I also disagree with those calling her "non-working" mother. Raising > 7 children is more than a full time job. And let's not forget that > before going to Hogwarts her kids were at home full time and were > almost certainly homeschooled (as I assume all children born to > magical parents are). Kind of hard to go out and work at some obscure > MoM position while running a household of 9 with no house elves to do > the work for you. So until Ginny went to school, she had to still be > a full time mom. After that - who can blame her for taking it a bit > easy for a few years. ...more snippage... > - and Molly is certainly > top-notch in the profession she chose. Choosing to focus your career > on your family is nothing to be ashamed of - and I say this as one > who has never been a stay at home mother, but who knows many who are. > > > Children need to be taught that both men and women need to work > hard > > to accomplish their goals. > > And you think Molly does not??? > > Salit In response, I first would like to say that Molly has performed her duties as stay at home mom adequately. In fact, I would even venture to muster a "good or very good" in her rating. However, to suggest that she "deserves a break" is going too far. When does Arthur get a break from being both Dad and Breadwinner? On vacation? No. He is still Dad. Therefore, no "Mom" should be offered the semblance of "break" when it comes to child-raising. Quite frankly, the idea that "her job is done" is both false and antiquated. Her job, was mother, now she must shift into a different role. The boggart scene reinforces my opinion that Molly lives her entire life through her family and extended family. That is unhealthy. I watched my mother change (being the youngest of three) from being a part-time stay-at-home mom (she worked part time also) to being an empty nest parent and she did not cope well. She was raised during a generation that both deified the mother for being the primary care- giver and vilified them for being sedentary. The perception of "taking a break" is unfair to both the woman and the breadwinner, and inaccurate. Let me re-iterate my sentiment from the prior post. Children, especially female children, should be taught that no matter what your profession, the only "breaks" you will get are vacations that you schedule through your employer (or in the case of the self-employed, yourself) and that never changes until you build enough of a nest egg or pension to retire, and at that time there will be no parent to take care of you. To give them any other message is false. Molly's foremost profession as a mother is finalizing (much like a long-term project). As in the case of many who choose her profession she will: 1)choose another project and use her freed time to devote to it, 2) putter aimlessly growing frustrated at her state of uselessness until it causes a rift in her home life at which time she will be forced to re-evaluate her persona, 3) Never realise the project has finalized and create sub-projects *such as meddling in her children's relationships, or grandchildren's lives* that help her hang on to the defunct project. I say, two of these scenarios are unhealthy at least and that is the difference between my generation and my mother's. I am able to recognize the disparity of thought and reason my way through the project transitions. (much like men have done for centuries, or to re- state, like men do until they reach retirement *joke, not all men handle retirement in the same fashion*) Currently, I juggle two child "projects", a career, hobbies and very part-time school. At least I don't have "husband" to add to that list. *just poking fun, no malice intended here* When the child-raising portion is complete, I will look forward to happy minor projects of grandchildren (not too soon, mind you...) and continue the long-term project of defining and redefining who I am and what I know and what I can learn. So, in conclusion, I stand by my initial opinion that Molly is not an accurate portrayal of mothers and is a carboard symbol for what JKR "wishes" her life to be. I believe that wish to be delusional and am calling her out on the fact, because IMO she should know better. I have read that she is a fan of psychology, if so, why can't she recognize her own mistakes? AND more importantly, why perpetuate the myth to a new generation? It is an injustice to them. Art From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Nov 6 14:40:29 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 14:40:29 -0000 Subject: Why is everyone afraid of Luna? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84217 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dan" wrote: > I don't mean, of course, in the books, though some of the ostracism > she experiences could be attributed to fear of her, or what she > represents, on the part of other characters, at bottom. No, I mean on > this list. > Absent for a couple months, I did a search and found very, very few > references to her at all. My own old posts showed up right away. > I have some speculations, naturally, as to why Lovegood isn't much > speculated on, but I want to ask people on the list a couple things > before I go too far in that direction. > Why was Luna introduced? > Why was she given the moment at the end of OOP with Potter? Jen: I don't think *fear* of discussion is a problem around here ;). Luna, by nature, is difficult to pin down. She is also a new character given a lot of page space (her own chapter!) traditionally reserved for the Trio. An interloper of sorts. I personally feel drawn to her, though, and post on every thread that comes along. While I didn't find her that engaging on my first read-through, I've grown to see her as a pivotal character and a strong one at that. In fact, at the risk of going on ad nauseam about my own theories, I think her Intuition was purposely brought in now to counterbalance Harry's Soul, Hermione's Mind and Ron's Heart. She represents an undeveloped side of Harry as this point--the ability to seek his own counsel and internal wisdom before acting. He has Hermione telling him what to do *logically*, and Ron loves him like a brother and supports him pretty much unconditionally, but Luna represents a new force, a person who lives for the most part by her own internal compass. We do get to see more of Harry's internal development in OOTP, his emotional and ethical development, and I believe Luna will play an important role in his continued growth. The scene where she talks with Harry about death is the 'initiation' for Harry into a new realm of his development, an area equally important to his magical skills and his bravery. And as an aside, I've floated a theory since July about Luna/Ollivander that was in a recent post, so I won't repeat it: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84059 So, speculate away, Dan! I'm curious to hear your take on Luna. From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 6 16:29:50 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 16:29:50 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84218 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "artcase" wrote: > So, in conclusion, I stand by my initial opinion that Molly is not an > accurate portrayal of mothers and is a carboard symbol for what > JKR "wishes" her life to be. I believe that wish to be delusional and > am calling her out on the fact, because IMO she should know better. I > have read that she is a fan of psychology, if so, why can't she > recognize her own mistakes? AND more importantly, why perpetuate the > myth to a new generation? It is an injustice to them. Now me: I'm sorry, but this really struck a nerve with me. First, what evidence can you point to that this is how JKR "wishes" her life to be? Second, and more importantly to me, why does JKR owe anybody anything? She writes books. That is what she does. She writes them the way she wants to and creates the characters she wants to. If we don't like them, that's fine...and we don't have to purchase or read her books. But why say/imply she OWES anyone out here in readerland anything? She doesn't! She has created a BUNCH of characters, and within that list of characters, some are lovable, some are despicable, some are "modern", some are "traditional", some are open, some are secretive, ... the list goes on & on. Clearly we readers love to identify with some and can't imagine doing so with others. So why is it bad or wrong or an injustice to include characters which don't mirror exactly what some of us want people to be like? I reiterate, I don't think JKR owes us ANYTHING in the way she creates her characters. If you don't like Molly, then don't like Molly; that's your right. But as for me, I don't think JKR has any obligation to make any character likeable or some model of perfection for any particular role in life. Sorry if this seems "hot-headed". I don't mean it to be, but I just feel pretty strongly about this idea that an author owes us readers anything. [I realize you didn't use the word "owe" but, to me, it was implied in the words "It is an injustice."] Have at me. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 16:32:19 2003 From: grannygoodwitch613 at yahoo.com (Granny Goodwitch) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 08:32:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) Message-ID: <20031106163219.72048.qmail@web20713.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84219 6November2003 Dan wrote: Why is everyone afraid of Luna? Granny responds: Not one bit! She's a breath of fresh air in OP as well as on the list. Dan: That the series is a kid's book series is no longer an issue. This must be of some relief to JKR, I would imagine. And also, liberating, in the subjects with which she can deal in the series. Granny: I'm not so sure about this. Haven't you ever reread a book that you'd read as a child and wondered how on earth you'd ever understood it? This is one of the marks of good literature--that one can reread it and still find a dimension that he'd previously missed, but still have enjoyed the story in his younger years. I can't help but imagine that a 15 year old who'd read Book 1 some years ago wouldn't see some very different issues today. Dan: I wonder if the alchemical interpretations of Hans, on one hand, and Grainger on the other are familiar to you. If analytical approaches like that to the book are germane, than aren't my more rhetorically based speculations also valid? Granny: Sorry Dan, I'm not yet familiar with Hans or Grainger yet. Must look them up. Dan: ...Why was Luna introduced? Granny: IMHO, Luna was introduced into the series at this late date because she must serve as a "pivot" in the story. Harry has come a long way since we first met him at the age of 11 some years ago. He's no longer a little boy, as the centaur in the Forest said about him, "This one's approaching manhood". Harry's world is no longer just about learning spells, charms and how to be a wizard. He must also learn to deal with life, and Luna's spaced-out character, but spring-to-action personility with no panic is just what Harry needs at this point. Dan: Why was she given the moment at the end of OOP with Potter? Granny: Good question. I'm still puzzled about this. (Looking for her thingas that other students had hidden, right?) I came up with a couple of ideas. (1) Maybe this was just another example of Luna's ability to take it all in stride and keep on keeping on with a clear (RW?) head in spite of the fact that others are laughing at her--a lesson that Harry could well learn OR (2) This is a foreshadowing to later events. Notice that we are not told exactly what was taken and how Luna always goes about finding them. Dan: But my point is more towards ... the fact of the chapter to herself, ... Granny: You've probably hit the nail right on the head here, Dan: "But of course JKR has some essential role for Lovegood." Luna's a hard one to put a finger on. So far, she only reacts to others, doesn't really initiate any action. But, when the situation called for spontaneous action, she reacted with a real sense of urgency. There's a lot of depth to this lady, so JKR gave her an entire chapter. Let's face it, how much does she say? Dan: ... Right now, that role is as another, alternate, more clearly emotional/spiritual, if you will, path to the Potter behind the scar. ... Granny: OK, but in addition, to serving as an emotional/spiritual path, I'd go so far as to say that Luna will function as a synthesizer for the Potter behind the scar-ie, synthesis of emotional with the heroic, rational Potter. Granny Goodwitch --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 16:44:57 2003 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 16:44:57 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84220 I'm not especially trying to defend Molly or anything, but it seems to me, Laura, that you sometimes have slightly unrealistic views of modern or not-so-modern moms. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > Laura responds: > Of course, there isn't a perfect child-rearing system. So the fact > that Molly treats all of her children exactly the same way should > make you wonder. They're hardly all the same sort of people. I know many parents out there who treat all their kids the same. My mom did :-) (and that nearly spelled disaster, lol) > Yes, exactly-it's Molly's attachment that isn't healthy. No, it's > not a natural maternal effect, whatever that is. It's Molly. > Can't help you on the parenting manuals question, I'm afraid. But > the ones I read back in the day all agreed that the parent's job is > to enable the child to achieve independence. Adult children and > parents should have a loving and close relationship, if possible, > but not a dependent one. Wow wow wow !! Now that's something YOU have read about, because you've tried to be an enlightened mom ! But do you have any idea how many parents out there STILL believe that kids are some kind of creations that must be molded to fit their parents' expectations ? The very notion that parents should "enable the child to achieve independence" would make quite a few parents, young or old, gape at you with amazement and confusion in their eyes. I still hear very often variations along the line of : "I made my kids for my own pleasure, they have to do what I want". And as far as saying that Molly's attachment is not healthy, I think you're going too far. Molly wants what's best for her kids and she thinks she knows better than they do, so what ? Seems perfectly normal to me. Wrong, but normal. She hasn't realised Bill is an adult, and maybe she never will, like many *many* moms. Perfectly normal, nothing unhealthy in that. > Laura: > Women who are mothers, even full time mothers (like me) have to > have some sort of independent emotional and/or intellectual lives > to be healthy and balanced human beings. YOU think that. I've met quite a few women who think something entirely different, namely that true happiness comes only in losing yourself completely in the service of yout family. If that makes them happy, who can say it's not healthy ? > Laura responds: > I was suggesting that the women I know who are at-home > mothers benefit, as I have, from some degree of a life away from > their kids. Even if it's a walk around the block by yourself or > watching tv and knitting, all parents (including full-time dads) > can use a bit of a break now and then. But some don't WANT to ! For some it's simply painful to be away from their family, even for the shortest of times ! > Laura responds: > > So Molly was a very busy and no doubt very tired > woman for many years. When we first meet her, she is down to only > one at home, and that one has gotten past the age of complete > physical dependence. She doesn't actually *need* to be a full-time > parent any more. She chooses to be one. Which is a bit > challenging if you don't have any kids at home, as happens the > following year. Molly wants to keep doing her job the same way she > always has even though its parameters have changed dramatically. You know, most people don't react *that* quickly to changes in their lives. I guess Molly just didn't realize beforehand how drastically her life would change once Ginny was off to school. And even after Ginny left, it might have taken months, maybe even years, for Molly to understand why she wasn't feeling too good. In real life, it often takes years for people to pinpoint the origin of their unhappiness. > Laura responds: > Yes, and how should you deal with fear? By gaining power over it. Honestly ! Look around you and tell me how many people actually deal with fear by gaining power over it ?! Most people I know, including me, simply RUN away, and refuse point-blank to face their fear, until they are somehow forced to, or until they have gathered enough courage to finally face it. > And the way people can do that in the WW is to learn what it will > take to defeat LV and his DEs. Knowledge is power. Molly wants to > deprive her kids of that. If you don't give your kids the tools > they need to take care of themselves in the world, you've done them > a grave (in this case, perhaps fatal) disservice. The evil doesn't > go away because Mommy didn't tell you about it. Intellectually I > understand why Molly acts as she does. But I couldn't do that to > my kids. I'd want to give them whatever it would take for them to > survive. So maybe you can help me with a problem I'll have to face in a few years : how do you tell a child about sex offenders that prey on kids ? Do you just tell them that there are bad people out there, and give them the techniques to avoid them (not get into cars, not take candy, etc...) ? But that would be akin to withholding information from them, wouldn't it ? So do you actually tell them WHAT those people are going to do to them if they catch them ? I personally can't imagine telling a kid, whether he be 5 or 15, about rape, torture, prostitution, porn, etc... I know I'll have to someday, but it revulses me. Just imagining the look of horror in their eyes when the full image of what I'm telling them sinks in their minds breaks my heart... Molly is just like me : trying to preserve her kids' *innocence* ! > Laura : > > What I'm saying is > that she wants to keep her children dependent on her because she > doesn't seem to see another alternative for herself. You always > keep your protective feelings no matter how old your kids get. But > you don't act the same way with a 15 year old as you do with a 15 > month old, and you don't act the same way with a 25 year old as you > do with a 15 year old. Then why do you think so many parents do just that ? Del From rredordead at aol.com Thu Nov 6 16:55:39 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 16:55:39 -0000 Subject: sexism in the WW (Was I know Molly.....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84221 Carol wrote: Snip > But it appears from Harry's glimpse of Snape's memories in > the Pensieve that Severus's father was extremely abusive and both his wife and his little son were terrified of him. That's an individual instance of a man dominating a woman and a child, I realize, but it has nothing to do with the influence of the muggle world. Now me: It is just a glimpse in to a society very different from our own. Don't you think we are possibly putting our own experiences of our unfortunate society where men regularly abuse women and children on to the tiny picture we have of the Snape family at home? Yes, it's a possibility that Mr. Snape is abusive to his wife and son but it is just as possible Mr. and Mrs. Snape were embroiled in a full out duel and the Mrs. got the worst end of a well aimed hit, or Snape Sr. was abusing Snape Jr. and Mrs. stepped in to stop it. There are many possible answers to what we saw and I'd encourage everyone to look at it from the sexually equal WW point of view. Time and time again JKR has shown us men and women are equal in the WW. Both sexes have always, since the WW kept records, competed with and against each other in Quiditch, served their country equally in both combat and in the government. Even the Quiditch locker room is unisex. And the villains! The two phenomenal villains of OotP were female. Bellatrix and Umbridge. Steven King himself described Professor Umbridge as possibly the greatest literary villain since Hannibal Lecter and I'm inclined to agree with him. And speaking of villains, the reason Voldemort's Death Eaters are primarily men? Because men have naturally a greater propensity toward aggression and domination. Two qualities we couldn't live without, but when mixed with Voldemort's ambitions only evil can result. Magical ability levels the playing field, as it is not based on physical strength. Even if a wizard resorts to physical violence a witch can easily fight back with magic. Mandy From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 17:07:54 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 17:07:54 -0000 Subject: Why is everyone afraid of Luna? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84222 Wondering why so few Luna posts, dan asked: > Why was Luna introduced? > Why was she given the moment at the end of OOP with Potter? Well, the reason *I* haven't posted on Luna lately is mostly because I haven't made any more progress in my understanding of her, although the new Granger article cited a few posts back certainly seems to have confirmed the feelings and thoughts that I'd had. Besides, these days I've been spending way too much time trying to pin down what I think Dumbledore has been doing! So, why was Luna introduced, besides as an alchemical symbol (alchemy not being one of my areas of expertise)? When she first appeared, my immediate reaction was to think, uh oh, here's that annoying character who's supposed to add interest or comic relief or something, but is just going to be spouting nonsense that's completely off the point. By the end of the book, I was completely taken with her. She is a completely new voice in Harry's world. It's hard for me to pin it down. I think she's represents acceptance of the "unconditional" that Harry has never known. Even though her mother is gone, Luna is still secure in her love, in what it means to be loved, and that the beloved never truly leave us -- indeed, we will see them again. She also seems to exhibit and unconditional acceptance of life. People's comments disappear into the pool of her tranquility without a ripple. She can see the thestrals, speak of her possessions disappearing or being called "Loony" with perfect calm. I don't mean to imply that she's indifferent to all this, just that somehow she has a very effective way of processing it, or something. Harry, on the other hand, has a more volatile, reactive personality, which, combined with the trouble that always finds him, has left him at the very end of his rope, at his wit's end, and seemingly feeling every kind of pain there is. Just at Harry's darkest hour, Luna is the balm to his wounds and the ray of hope. Dumbledore couldn't be that. Ron, Hermione, and the others could be no help, and neither for once could Hagrid, though he tried. Harry couldn't do it for himself as he sat so long by the lake; he could only try *not* to think about his godfather, or feel as human as everyone else, or even feel the cold. Only Luna could lighten his burden, and only after that could he bear to be with the others. Gee, I didn't know I had all that in me! I think the answer to your second question is in there, too. When I read the passages where Harry worried that he would no longer be "as good as a son," or when Molly's hug was unbearable instead of comforting after Harry overheard that Voldemort might be possessing him, I was sad that he had no idea what "unconditional love" might mean, no sense that anyone would have that for him (well, IMO Sirius did love him that way but Harry had no true realization of it). I think Harry is going to need the security this would provide him in the years ahead, and I believe Luna could be the one to help him achieve it. I don't necessarily mean this to be a romantic relationship at all, although I wouldn't rule it out eventually. Finishing up, I also think there will be more to Luna than this. Her own security in herself is what allows her to be so open to all the people, ideas, and possibilities in the world. She has the potential to help Harry and the others in this area as well. Annemehr From moorequests at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 16:01:42 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 16:01:42 -0000 Subject: Why's the Bloody Baron so bloody? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84223 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkittyhawk97" wrote: > If I'm not mistaken, someone asked that very question in SS/PS. > > Let's see... > > "How did he get covered in blood?" asked Seamus with great interest. > "I've never asked," said Nearly Headless Nick delicately. > (pg 124 US version) > > Well, we all know that contention between Slytherins and Gryffindors > is nothing new. What if the Soon-to-be-nearly-headless Sir Nicholas > de Mimsy Porpington got into a bit of a *dispute* (to be worded > lightly) with the soon-to-be-bloody Baron, and the Baron didn't > manage to completely sever Nick's head, because Nick was killing him > at the same time. > > Icky, I know. > > Obviously, even now, after 500 years, and after becoming the best of > friends (as ghosts) it would be a touchy subject for them to... > er... discuss openly with ickle first years. > > I know that's the only evidence I have... but anyhoo... thoughts? > > "nkittyhawk97" Unless Harry becomes friends with him, like he has become friends with Nearly Headless Nick, I doubt we'll ever know. I get the feeling that the ghosts don't want to talk about their deaths because they have never truly accepted them. (Nick's obsession about not being fully decapitated, and his speech to Harry about how he was a coward and didn't go on to the afterlife.) I'm guessing it was the same way with the Bloody Baron. Whatever happened to him, gruesome as it was, he was unwilling to accept it. He's a very taciturn fellow, apparently, so that also is evidence of his unwillingness to accept. I don't think the Bloody Baron killed him, however, since if you reread the part in CoS where Nick is describing his beheading, it doesn't sound like a struggle, but kind of an organized thing... maybe he was executed for witchcraft or something. -M.M. From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 17:22:36 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 09:22:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: About Neville's parents Message-ID: <20031106172236.33636.qmail@web40011.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84224 6November03 "moorequests" wrote: and Neville takes it (Droobles bubble gum wrapper) and puts it in his pocket. Is this just significant that Mrs. Longbottom has lost her mind, or do you think she's trying to say something to Neville? nkittyhawk: yeah... I thought that was a bit... I don't know... disruptive of the scene. Almost as if it had been inserted there *wink wink* for reasons JKR isn't going to reveal until later... Paula now: After recent posts, I looked this scene up again. Has anyone noticed that the name of the ward for terminally ill patients is Janus Thickey? Janus was the Roman god who had 2 faces, positioned back to back. Could JKR be telling us something about the goings-on behind the scene at St Mungos? I strongly suspect so *wink wink*. JKR often attaches meaning to names. Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 6 17:40:12 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 17:40:12 -0000 Subject: Maturity as a theme in OoP and Sirius' future plot relevance (WAS: Sirius quite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84225 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tom Wall" wrote: A long response from Tom. Heavy clipping but I'll try not to simplify his arguments too much or take things deliberately out of context. > Tom: > You know, I'd go for this whole idea that Sirius was not what he > seemed to be, if only for the fact that it's already been done > repeatedly. > > It would seem sort of redundant to do it all over again, don't you > think? I mean, the man's dead now. How many times can we possibly > flip-flop on his character and still keep it interesting? I'd say > that the battery-life concerning serious revelations about Sirius is > about run down to nothing, really. Kneasy: I'm not so sure. Note that I didn't (surprise, surprise) *insist* that he would be revealed as Evil!Sirius, in fact that is only one of three, (? four) revelations I can think of that might have plot implications. Don't forget Sirius is linked to a lot more characters than just Harry and his actions, history and motivations can affect them too. > Tom: > But Kneasy, that's what this list is all about! Post-facto > rationalization is what makes HPfGU go `round, wouldn't you say? I > mean, it's what constitutes nearly all of the theoretical endeavors > that go on around here. I mean, without post-facto rationalization, > what would we have to do, anyways? ;-) Kneasy: Tut, tut. What an admission. Well, it is if you employ my usages of the critical words! Analysis - lovely; spend long hours skull-bashing, gathering bits of canon and deriving reasonable assumptions. Developing these into a theory and watching the rest of the site yawn at the result. What better way to spend an evening? Post facto rationalisation (by my definition) doesn't involve hard work at all. It's more of an off-the-cuff knee-jerk reaction (if that's not too much of a mixed metaphor). It can be correct, of course, which is bloody annoying. My motto is "Posters should suffer in pursuit of the truth." Tom: > For my take, I'm inclined to accept the author's statements on this. > > She said in that giant-webcast a while back that the death in Book > Five was specifically designed to illustrate several points. First > off, it was supposed to demonstrate clearly that our characters are > now in a wartime situation, which means that one minute you can be > talking to your best friend and the next minute that person can be > dead as a doornail. > > Secondly, JKR said that the death in OoP was written because of how > Harry would take it, because of how it would affect him. Now, this > is basically a blatant admission that his death was used to > facilitate Harry's overall growth and understanding. But that point > aside, it's seems fair to assert that no death could have been as > traumatic for Harry as Sirius' - Kneasy: Maybe. But I would have thought the death of Cedric in Book 4 amply covered point one. That really was a pointless and unexpected death. Harry suffered because of it too, in Book 5. Because of the timing of Sirius' death, we won't see the longer term effects until Book 6. How long is all this death trauma supposed to remain at centre stage? All this battering is more likely to turn him into a fatalist instead of 'facilitating his growth.' Personally, I don't think you learn anything = from the death of someone close. Except how to grieve. How adult is that? I don't really trust JKR when she talks like that. Occasionally she may give clues to an event, such as a death, but when she talks of themes I'm on my guard. It is such an easy way to mislead us while we think we have received a real answer. As to Sirius' death being the most shocking - have you considered his reaction if it had been Ron? Tom > I'm actually surprised that you'd discount the theme of maturity as > simply a pop-psychological rationalizing afterthought of the events > in the story. It seems to me that maturity ? or at least the growth > into maturity - is a theme that the author quite deliberately > highlighted in OoP. > Kneasy: Not quite what I said. It is *a* theme. There are multiple themes. But if you only consider one theme, you are like someone whose tool kit consists only of a hammer - everything looks like a nail. Tom: > And in the Department of Mysteries, we're treated to the > delightfully bizarre metaphor of the Death Eater who is forced to de- > mature and mature in cycles: if this isn't harping on the theme of > maturity, I don't know what is. ;-) Kneasy: Oh, I don't know. Time bending seems to be of growing importance in the series, I'm certainly expecting more of it. I can't equate the nature of time with maturity somehow (except in the broadest sense). I have a feeling that the head-shrinker in the Ministry is something pointing to the *cyclical* nature of events rather than maturity per se. Tom: > One could further discuss maturity and its attainment as a theme in > OoP through Snape's Worst Memory, the realizations that accompany > that in the context of Harry's past and future views of James and > Lily, the formation of the DA and the DA's connection to the kids' > growing understanding of the peril in the world around them, the > limited information that Lupin and Sirius grant to Harry in the > beginning of the novel and the fact that this represents his first > real inclusion and interaction in the plans and planning of adults. > We could go into the very conscious repetition of the concept > of "disobeying" one's parents (and that theme's relationship to > maturity in the sense of making decisions for oneself) as > illustrated not only by Ron and his mother's request to stay out of > the DA, but also by the twins' attainment of "Age", Cho, Marietta, > and, Whoa! Sirius himself in reference to his parents and his > brother Regulus. We could talk maturity concerning Dumbledore's > advanced state of it, and how maturity occasionally takes one > further away from an understanding of youth, or in the context > of "Career Advice" and the idea of self-regulation and a sense of > personal direction and responsibility, or of the symbolic nature of > naming prefects (students who oversee students in the stead of > adults), or we could go into an analysis of OWLS and how they > represent a rite of passage for the average youngster in the WW, a > rite of passage that, in many ways, determines the future of these > young people, nevermind the quite blatantly literalized metaphor > that is the "Disillusionment" to which Moody subjects Harry at the > story's outset. Disillusionment is, of course, a classic conundrum > when it comes the maturation process. > Kneasy: Difficult to snip this without butchering it. I see this as a prime 'hammer' interpretation. You don't seem to have considered any other alternatives. Knowledge is not maturity, how you use it may be. Disobedience is not maturity (Ron did worse with the flying car). Cho and Marietta show little sign of it. Sirius (re Regulus) is filling in background DD seems to understand teenagers very well, but he deliberately lies to further his own plans. Career advice is a right of passage, but nobody seems mature enough to make realistic choices. Disillusionment can happen at any age. (And always after careers advice.) With Harry it happened when he realised what the Dursleys were really like. He'd be about seven, I imagine. IMO opinion you're reaching a bit too far with nearly all these examples. You see them as indicators of maturity, I see most as necessary information and plot developments essential for the reader to know what the hell is going on. Tom: > Also, in a more peripheral sense, Harry's dealings with the Ministry > and St.Mungo's both illustrate to me a conscious effort on the part > of JKR to illustrate Harry's increasing involvement in the adult > world of the Potterverse, while simultaneously keeping Harry > somewhat trapped in the juvenile world of Hogwarts. > Kneasy: True, these incidents do involve him in parts of the adult world he hasn't experienced before and they probably will colour his outlook to a certain degree. Yes, Harry is growing up, he will have to deal with adults on adult terms, his attitudes may change as a result, he will mature, that is inevitable given the time scale of the series, or it is unless he cops it in the neck, but that's not likely. But consider, when have the pupils of Hogwarts really been treated like children? Only during Dolly's reign, IMO. At other times the climate has been remarkably formal and adult. Childhood seemed to be left behind once they first boarded the Hogwarts Express. How many of the children were homesick? None, apparently. Very adult. JKR seems to have gone out of her way to present her younger characters as mature from the start, apart from what I would refer to as learning about the hurly-burly of the chaise-longue. Lacking knowledge, yes, child-like, no. Tom: > Really, when you put it all together, maturity doesn't seem at all > like post-facto rationalization, does it? It's quite clearly a major > theme in the novel, at least the way that I read it. > Kneasy: Trying to pull a fast one there, Tom? I never said that maturity wasn't a theme, or that it was post facto rationalisation, it isn't. I said the automatic assumption that Sirius' death was solely about emotional maturity were pfr. I still do. Aspects of Sirius not before appreciated will have clout, IMO. Tom: > Oh, and finally on the death: this is something that JKR didn't > outright say, but I ardently believe it anyways. Sirius' death was > about the last thing I saw coming. Before OoP we had a poll that > concerned itself with "Who do you think will de in Book Five?" About > three percent of the respondents on that poll thought that Sirius > would be the one to go. Sirius' death was about as Bang!y as you > could get, given the circumstances and expectations that surrounded > OoP's release. Kneasy: I got it wrong too. I said Ginny would be it. Which would have been even Bangier, particularly as I posted that Percy would be at fault. I felt cheated by it being Sirius. Not very gory, either. Most disappointin= g. But I tend towards lip-smacking, blood-boultered mayhem. Yippee! From pen at pensnest.co.uk Thu Nov 6 17:58:07 2003 From: pen at pensnest.co.uk (Pen Robinson) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 17:58:07 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84226 On Thursday, Nov 6, 2003, at 14:38 Europe/London, artcase wrote: >> > The boggart scene > reinforces my opinion that Molly lives her entire life through her > family and extended family. That is unhealthy. I'm surprised that you see it like this. I am certain that my boggart, if I had one, would be the same - the dead bodies of my husband and children. What could possibly be worse? This is not living one's life through one's family, this is loving them more than anything else in the world. I don't mean to say that Molly is without fault, but I think you're wrong on this point. Pen From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 6 18:38:20 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 18:38:20 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins (was No Sex, Please) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84227 > The Sergeant Majorette said: > > > However, when you claim to be the most powerful Dark Wizard in the world and that you're justified in killing hundreds of innocent people and I paid 25 bucks for your latest adventure, I want to see some serious motivation. I was way pi--, I mean annoyed -- when the name that strikes terror into the hearts of wizards everywhere turned out to be an anagram (could that be more pre-teen?) and now he wants us to feel somthing because his mother was cruelly abandoned? See the chaplain, Private. Sounds like a personal problem to me. > > Now that Draco turns out to be an oxygen thief and a total waste of other natural resources and Harry isn't cute anymore, I see troubled times ahead for the franchise if Voldemort doesn't step up to the plate and get more interesting.<<< There are only so many ways in which people become disfunctional. Corny as it is to say it, healthy people crave relationships based on trust and mutual aid. If the ability to trust is damaged, then the craving may turn to other things: drugs or alcohol or relationships based on power. Voldemort probably can't get over it, even if there were chaplains in the wizarding world; he's too damaged. But paranoids can make effective leaders; fear of a common enemy breaks down the barriers between people, and paranoids are very good at identifying enemies. Revealing Voldemort's childhood trauma shows the reader what sort of person he is, and why he craves power so much. What's more interesting than Voldemort is why Harry, who' s had the same experiences, doesn't turn out the same way. Granger's article said that Harry lives in fear of the Dursleys. But that's not true, IMO. Harry's never been afraid of the Durselys. They don't make his stomach clench or his heart race, he doesn't have nightmares about them or worry about what they'll do to him next, he doesn't invent rituals to placate them. In fact, it's the other way around. It's the Dursleys whose adrenalin gets pumping around Harry, they angst constantly and they have rituals: don't answer questions: don't leave Harry by himself, don't say the 'M' word. Pippin From starropal at hotmail.com Thu Nov 6 18:40:06 2003 From: starropal at hotmail.com (Star Opal) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 12:40:06 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] First name adressing = same House? + Snape the Vampire (yes, again) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84228 Inge wrote: >I wonder in which house Hagrid was back then - do we have any canon >to tell? Star Opal here: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/1000-livechat-barnesnoble.html "Barnes and Noble Chat 20 October 2000 What house was Hagrid in? Hagrid was in Gryffindor, naturally!" Star Opal Back to lurking! _________________________________________________________________ Frustrated with dial-up? Get high-speed for as low as $26.95. https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.) From happydogue at aol.com Thu Nov 6 18:45:20 2003 From: happydogue at aol.com (happydogue at aol.com) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 13:45:20 -0500 Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) Message-ID: <01E7094E.076A7420.0B4B226A@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84229 Afraid of Luna? Luna plays the role of the scapegoat kid that is at school that everyone is free to pick on. Look at how when they met her on the train they were reluctant to sit in the same compartment and as a group they were free to call her Loonie. They did not just think of the name on the spot, they were comfortable with the name as if they had been using it for a while. Even after they had become friends, Ron relapse into calling her Loonie while they are in the Dept. of Mysteries. At the end of the book when she met Harry, she was looking for her personal possessions that students had taken from her. Lunas comments to Harry lead the reader to believe that this is not the first time that they have taken her things. This is not the way you treat someone you are afraid of. Luna just happens to have the personality that it doesnt matter to her. She has better things to do and she is going to live with it. This is unlike two other characters that seem to also have had the same problem. One was Peter P. He chooses to become the doormat of the marauders. By allowing the gang to walk all over him they allowed him to be one of the gang. The other person treated this way as a youth was Snape. Like Luna he was smart and different which made him a perfect target for the playground bullies of Black and Potter. Instead of kowtowing to the gang he chooses to fight. Of course he was outnumbered and look what happened to him. (This whole scenario is similar to the places where a kid has been abused by classmates and ends up going to school with a gun). In my opinion this whole grouping of people, along with Dudleys treatment of Harry, will be part of Harrys metamorphous from a typical unthinking kid to the adult he needs to be to fight with the dark lord. Harry knows what it is like to be on the receiving end of abuse and the hole series of events is going to lead to some type of change in his character. Already at the end of the book when Harry was speaking with Luna, you could begin to see the change in his character. He was beginning to look at the behavior of Black and his father in a more adult manner. Just my opinion, JMM From oppen at mycns.net Thu Nov 6 18:53:00 2003 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 12:53:00 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] About Neville's parents References: <20031106172236.33636.qmail@web40011.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <00a901c3a497$34a129a0$e4510043@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 84230 > 6November03 > > "moorequests" wrote: > > and Neville takes it (Droobles bubble gum wrapper) and puts it in his pocket. Is this just > significant that Mrs. Longbottom has lost her mind, or do you think she's trying to say something to Neville? > > > nkittyhawk: yeah... I thought that was a bit... I don't know... disruptive of the scene. Almost as if it had been inserted there *wink wink* for reasons JKR isn't going to reveal until later... > > Paula now: > > After recent posts, I looked this scene up again. Has anyone noticed that the name of the ward for terminally ill patients is Janus Thickey? Janus was the Roman god who had 2 faces, positioned back to back. Could JKR be telling us something about the goings-on behind the scene at St Mungos? I strongly suspect so *wink wink*. JKR often attaches meaning to names. > > Paula "Griff" Gaon Eric pipes up: I hadn't thought anything of the first name...lots of magical folks have names from Classical languages, such as: Albus (Dumbledore), Mulciber (the Death Eater), Lucius, Narcissa and Draco (Malfoy), Severus (Snape) and so on. However, the word "thickey" or "thickie" in British slang, at least as I understand it, means a very stupid person..one who is "thick"---meaning slow of mind and a few feet behind everybody else, brains-wise. It could be Herself's sense of humor, or it could mean something. From BrenErik at aol.com Thu Nov 6 17:19:23 2003 From: BrenErik at aol.com (BrenErik at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 12:19:23 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin's Chocolate, WAS: Lupin's sense of humor (and a bun... Message-ID: <2f.411ef0ea.2cdbdc9b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84231 In a message dated 11/6/2003 5:14:57 AM Central Standard Time, liz at studylink.com writes: > Oh yeah. I think Lupin's appointment to the DA post this particular year is > definitely calculated by DD. DD wants him at Hogwarts because of any insight > he may offer in the Sirius area, and DD wanted him on the Express armed with > chocolate and a competent patronus just in case of any trouble with the > dementors. Why else is he there? No other teacher ever takes the Express. I have to agree. It would be interesting to find out if DD had approached Lupin about the position prior to finding out Sirius had escaped or afterward. I don't think we know that detail do we? It seems it would make perfect sense if it was done afterward as Lupin, aside from the points you mentioned, would also have a vested interest in Harry as the child of one of his best friends. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 6 19:03:50 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 19:03:50 -0000 Subject: Maturity as a theme in OoP and Sirius' future plot relevance (WAS: Sirius quite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84232 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > > Laura: > > Not that it's impossible-nothing is impossible in JKR's writing-but > have we learned that any dead character is the opposite of what > he/she seemed to be? I exclude James here; we have more to learn > about him, I think, and besides, just because he was a teenaged jerk > doesn't make him Ever So Evil. > Kneasy; Maligned again! Not that I'd mind if Sirius were a nasty, but that is not the only option. But yes, he is dead, permanently, I believe. No curtain calls, reprises or comebacks. Hooray! Laura: > What Kneasy calls post facto rationalization some of us would call > literary analysis. *grin* Explaining characters' actions by > theorizing about their psychological motivations is eminently > reasonable-otherwise the explanation is "because the author made him > do it". > Kneasy: Not in my book it's not. pfr is too simple to be analysis, at least if you use my usage of the phrase. Psychology too is easy. There is no objective evidence for its validity. Surprised? You shouldn't be. Anything that is incapable of being even averagely predictive when it claims to have a monopoly on the under- standing of the human mind and the triggers for behaviour cannot be taken seriously as a scientific discipline. No, what matters is *plot*, action and rigorous reasoning. > Laura: > > It's hard to believe that Harry could be any safer while LV is alive > and well. > Kneasy: Oh yes he can. He can learn to be a proper wizard instead of farting about letting his feelings get in the way. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 6 19:22:05 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 19:22:05 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84233 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "artcase" wrote: > > So, in conclusion, I stand by my initial opinion that Molly is not an > accurate portrayal of mothers and is a carboard symbol for what > JKR "wishes" her life to be. I believe that wish to be delusional and > am calling her out on the fact, because IMO she should know better. I > have read that she is a fan of psychology, if so, why can't she > recognize her own mistakes? AND more importantly, why perpetuate the > myth to a new generation? It is an injustice to them. > > Art You'll forgive me saying so, but bosh, tosh and utter tripe. Within one hundred yards of where I'm bashing the keyboard there are at least 9 such mothers to my certain knowledge. These are women varying in age from 28 to 50 years old. There's a quote from G.B.Shaw which may be applicable: "Forgive him, Caesar, he is a barbarian and thinks the customs of his country are the laws of nature." I allow you every right to an opinion as to how you think people should behave, but distorting or denying facts will not go unchallenged. Kneasy From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Thu Nov 6 19:27:57 2003 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 19:27:57 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84234 --- Pippin wrote: > But say, pace Shippers, that Hermione wants to > marry a Weasley. Will St. Mungo's refuse to > train her as a wizarding dentist/healer because > everybody knows that Weasley wives have umpteen > zillion children and no time for another career? > If she decides not to have umpteen zillion > children, will she be getting tiny easter eggs > for the rest of Molly's life? --- Erin replied: > Well... I just can't see the St. Mungo's thing, > I really can't. I mean this is a society in > which Alice Longbottom can be an auror during > the uprising of the most dangerous dark wizard > in a century, while she is pregnant and while > she has a young baby. I think the WW is a lot > less sexist than you're trying to make it out > to be. I agree with Erin; going beyond her specific examples, nearly every profession we've seen in the WW has been roughly equally held by men and women. See my post # 84097, which Yahoo!mort failed to thread in with the rest of this discussion. Moreover, I think Pippin is projecting some stereotypes onto Molly's character in assuming that, were Hermione and Ron to marry, Molly would object to Hermione's career aspirations. The only reasons to think Molly would expect a large family are (1) it is what Weasleys do, or (2) she expects for her children the life she and Arther have chosen for themselves. I don't see much evidence to support either of those premises. As to (1), IIRC, the only people we hear suggesting that "all Weasleys have big families" are Draco and Lucius, who both say it out of spite, and could easily be basing the put-down solely on Arthur's family. We haven't seen any siblings of Molly or Arthur, as we might have if either of them had come from a large family. (We are told they both show up on the Black family tree, but without any suggestion as to the size of their immediate families.) As to (2), I don't see that Molly necessarily wants her children to live the same life she has lived. She clearly wants them to be respectable (e.g., Bill's hair; F/G's career choice), safe (worries about deaths, etc.), and, at least to some extent, achievement-oriented (pride in school honors). We haven't heard anything from her about wanting them to settle down and have kids -- such comments might well have surfaced around Bill & Fleur, for instance, had Molly held such expectations. -- Matt From erinellii at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 20:11:42 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 20:11:42 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84235 "Matt" : I don't see that Molly necessarily wants her children to > live the same life she has lived. She clearly wants them to be > respectable (e.g., Bill's hair; F/G's career choice), safe (worries > about deaths, etc.), and, at least to some extent, > achievement-oriented (pride in school honors). We haven't heard > anything from her about wanting them to settle down and have kids -- > such comments might well have surfaced around Bill & Fleur, for > instance, had Molly held such expectations. Ah, but then there's another reason Molly may shortly be sending Fleur the tiny Easter eggs. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80951 Erin From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Thu Nov 6 20:29:08 2003 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 09:29:08 +1300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP: movie contamination In-Reply-To: <2F16AE0A.677AF363.1E595A1B@aol.com> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20031107092346.0234ba30@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 84236 At 18:57 5/11/2003 -0500, you wrote: >Adrianna wrote > >I'm inclined to agree. I was convinced of an R+H ship for ages. But the >more I go back and reread the books, especially OOTP, the more I'm >inclined to believe H+H. > >I don't think Ron and Hermione would make a very good couple and I was >struck by this the most in a re-read of POA and OOTP. Ron is always making >fun of Hermione and the things she cares about. Like SPEW. > >Harry makes fun a bit too, but not as much, and not so much to her face. >Also, he doesn't tell Hermione that Dobby is the one taking all of her >clothes, because her clothes making makes her happy and he doesn't want to >hurt her feelings. > >I haven't really formed any hard core arguements about any ships, but I'm >inclined towards H+H. > >Adrianna Tanya here. I thought the same, at first had the idea it might be R&H and perhaps H&G. But reading GoF, I find it interesting that Krum singles out Harry to have a few words to. I have difficulty believing that Hermione only talked about Harry to him without mentioning Ron. But is possible I guess. But still, I do hope Harry avoids attachments until the war is over, it will only give LV and his buddies an extra weapon to use. Tanya From foxmoth at qnet.com Thu Nov 6 21:02:45 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 21:02:45 -0000 Subject: SHIP: movie contamination In-Reply-To: <2F16AE0A.677AF363.1E595A1B@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84237 > [Brian] > > > I was polling a couple of my students about their SHIPping > > preferences. The thought occurred to me that my R/H SHIP > > inclination, and SHIPping in general is a product of movie > > contamination. We didn't always use the prefix. But shipping and ship debates on this list have been going on since for ever, long before the movies came out. Adrianna > I'm inclined to agree. I was convinced of an R+H ship for ages. But the more I go back and reread the books, especially OOTP, the more I'm inclined to believe H+H. > > I don't think Ron and Hermione would make a very good couple and I was struck by this the most in a re-read of POA and OOTP. Ron is always making fun of Hermione and the things she cares about. Like SPEW. > > Harry makes fun a bit too, but not as much, and not so much to her face. << Actually, I take this as a bad sign for the H/H ship. I see the fact that Ron and Hermione are willing and able to talk about their differences as more hopeful. If Ron and Hermione want to, they can find ways of addressing their differences without hurting one another. Harry's unwillingness to let Hermione know when she's being annoying could land H/H in hot water. Eventually it will come out in a moment of anger and make her feel that she never knew him at all. Pippin From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 6 21:21:17 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 21:21:17 -0000 Subject: Why is everyone afraid of Luna? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84238 Annemehr wrote: > So, why was Luna introduced ? When she first appeared, my >immediate reaction was to think, uh oh, here's that annoying >character who's supposed to add interest or comic relief or >something, but is just going to be spouting nonsense that's >completely off the point. By the end of the book, I was completely >taken with her. She is a completely new voice in Harry's world. > > I think she's represents acceptance of the "unconditional" that >Harry has never known. She also seems to exhibit an >unconditional acceptance of life. People's comments disappear into >the pool of her tranquility without a ripple. She can see the >thestrals, speak of her possessions disappearing or being >called "Loony" with perfect calm. I don't mean to imply that she's >indifferent to all this, just that somehow she has a very effective >way of processing it, or something. Harry, on the other hand, has >a more volatile, reactive personality . > Just at Harry's darkest hour, Luna is the balm to his wounds and > the ray of hope. Dumbledore couldn't be that. Ron, Hermione, and >the others could be no help, and neither for once could Hagrid, >though he tried. Only Luna could lighten his burden, and >only after that could he bear to be with the others. > I think Harry is going to need the security this would provide him > in the years ahead, and I believe Luna could be the one to help him > achieve it. I don't necessarily mean this to be a romantic > relationship at all, although I wouldn't rule it out eventually. > Now me: What a wonderful post! I must admit that when I first encountered Luna I thought **exactly** what you've said here about the annoying character!!!! Unfortunately, when the book ended, I STILL wasn't won over. Why? Probably because I'm "protective" of my own vision of who I think should be in Harry's life and, even, with whom he should start a romance. Probably also, if I'm being honest, because her wackiness still makes me uncomfortable. I'm not sure I would like Luna as an *active* participant in Harry's life. I'm not sure I really want to see him expand his circle any further. I certainly hope LUNA isn't the one with whom Harry develops a romance. (Ick.) She's still too "out there" for me. I agree with everything you've said about her incredible ability to process and to accept peacefully...but she's still too annoying for me to fully accept her as a CENTRAL character. However, as I mentioned in a previous post today, none of this is my call, is it? :-) JKR owes me nothing. So really, all I can say is that if Luna *is* going to be one of the central characters, I just hope JKR spends a good part of book 6 helping me feel better about all of that. :-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From amani at charter.net Thu Nov 6 21:25:07 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 16:25:07 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is everyone afraid of Luna? References: Message-ID: <008b01c3a4ac$7546a4c0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84239 dan: Why was Luna introduced? Why was she given the moment at the end of OOP with Potter? Taryn: I absolutely loved Luna as a character. (And I really ought to reread OotP. Actually, I really ought to get my copy back so I can reread it. :P) I especially enjoyed her scene with Harry at the end of OotP. I think the important reason why Harry opened up to LUNA about it and not to Ron and Hermione, his best friends, is because Luna has experienced death. And there's a difference when you know someone has had that experience of losing someone so close to you. And Luna's entire mannerism is so....unassuming. I can just imagine it being so easy to open up to her. --Taryn [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From pegruppel at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 22:02:05 2003 From: pegruppel at yahoo.com (Peggy) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:02:05 -0000 Subject: About Neville's parents In-Reply-To: <20031106172236.33636.qmail@web40011.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84240 > After recent posts, I looked this scene up again. Has anyone noticed that the name of the ward for terminally ill patients is Janus Thickey? Janus was the Roman god who had 2 faces, positioned back to back. Could JKR be telling us something about the goings-on behind the scene at St Mungos? I strongly suspect so *wink wink*. JKR often attaches meaning to names. > > Paula "Griff" Gaon > > Welcome aboard the good SHIP SILK GOWNS! Captain Jen doesn't seem to have found this message yet, so one of the crew of that good ship is here to say that much thought, dicussion, and even anagramming have gone into the construction of our good ship that lies yonder in TBAY. Peg--Who's at work right now and can't stop to find the original post, but searching SILK GOWNS should get you there! From Zarleycat at aol.com Thu Nov 6 22:18:36 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:18:36 -0000 Subject: Why is everyone afraid of Luna? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84241 Annemehr wrote: > It's hard for me to pin it down. I think she's represents acceptance > of the "unconditional" that Harry has never known. Even though her > mother is gone, Luna is still secure in her love, in what it means to > be loved, and that the beloved never truly leave us -- indeed, we will > see them again. She also seems to exhibit and unconditional > acceptance of life. People's comments disappear into the pool of her > tranquility without a ripple. She can see the thestrals, speak of her > possessions disappearing or being called "Loony" with perfect calm. I > don't mean to imply that she's indifferent to all this, just that > somehow she has a very effective way of processing it, or something. > Harry, on the other hand, has a more volatile, reactive personality, > which, combined with the trouble that always finds him, has left him > at the very end of his rope, at his wit's end, and seemingly feeling > every kind of pain there is. > > Just at Harry's darkest hour, Luna is the balm to his wounds and the > ray of hope. Dumbledore couldn't be that. Ron, Hermione, and the > others could be no help, and neither for once could Hagrid, though he > tried. Harry couldn't do it for himself as he sat so long by the > lake; he could only try *not* to think about his godfather, or feel as > human as everyone else, or even feel the cold. Only Luna could > lighten his burden, and only after that could he bear to be with the > others. Now me: I wonder, too, if Harry doesn't see a kindred spirit of a sort with Luna. She has lost a parent. Harry, for all intents and purposes, never had parents. Neither Ron or Hermione understand what that means emotionally. Granted, Luna's mom was not gunned down by Voldy, but still, she has had to go through part of her young life without that maternal influence. Luna is looked on as downright weird by a lot of students, even those in her own house. Harry is also often a target of suspicion and distrust by his fellow students. He has been fortunate to have Ron and Hermione to give him support most of the time, but I think that Harry feels he is "different" than other students and often feels a certain separation from them. This feeling is heightened now because of the Prophecy. Luna, however, seems to be the only person Harry has encountered that also has an aura of separateness about her. Part of that might be her somehwat spacy demeanour or because she's not shy about stating her beliefs in whatever "The Quibbler" prints. But, once she revealed that she, too, could see the thestrals and hear the voices behind the veil, that put her on a different level for me. I think she will help Harrry see things from a different perspective. Luna provides someone to balance the intellectual input Harry gets from Hermione and the practical, down-to-earth friendship he gets from Ron. Marianne From tim_regan82 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 6 22:29:43 2003 From: tim_regan82 at hotmail.com (Tim Regan) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:29:43 -0000 Subject: Trelawney's sibling's book Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84242 Hi All | | | | | | | | | | | | Lyra's Oxford spoiler warning | | | | | | | | | | | Did anyone else notice the entry in the books for sale by Smith & Strange Ltd, listed on the reverse of the map of Lyra's Oxford tucked into the new Pullman book? Among them is hidden Fraud: an Exposure of a Scientific Imposture by Professor P. Trelawney Ph.D., F.R.A.S., F.B.A. Any relation? Cheers, Dumbledad From Batchevra at aol.com Thu Nov 6 22:47:32 2003 From: Batchevra at aol.com (Batchevra at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 17:47:32 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin's Chocolate, WAS: Lupin's sense of humor (and a bun... Message-ID: <14c.2666aa6f.2cdc2984@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84243 In a message dated 11/6/03 6:15:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, liz at studylink.com writes: > > How would the fact that he had transformed the night before mean that he had > to take the Express? I agree he probably did recently because he was so > tired, but I don't think having to travel to Kings Cross, then sleeping in > an awkward position for 8 hours on a train with a lot of rowdy kids would be > easier for him than flooing into DD's office or apparating to Hogsmede and > spending the day in bed at Hogwarts. I don't think being appointed at the > last minute would make either of these options unworkable either. On the > other hand, maybe he can't afford floo powder, and apparating takes more > concentration than he can manage in his exhausted state. > > Still, he did have the chocolate. But maybe he's just a chocolate nut (as > many fic authors like to believe) and having it is yet another happy > coincidence. Canon hasn't told us for sure, so I guess we'll never know. > > Maybe he just wanted to take the train to get an early gander at Harry. > > Liz > > > > I think that it was a combination of being appointed at the last minute, the transformation and not being able to afford somethings, is what put Lupin onto the train on Sept. 1. As you said, we don't know for sure because canon doesn't tell us. By the way, I looked up when the full moon was that year and it was at around 2 AM that date. Batchevra [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From yswahl at stis.net Thu Nov 6 22:49:54 2003 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 22:49:54 -0000 Subject: Why is everyone afraid of Luna? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84244 dan Absent for a couple months, I did a search and found very, very few references to her at all. My own old posts showed up right away. I have some speculations, naturally, as to why Lovegood isn't much speculated on, but I want to ask people on the list a couple things before I go too far in that direction. Why was Luna introduced? Why was she given the moment at the end of OOP with Potter? samnanya I have posted quite extensively on Luna and my opinions on why she was introduced though it seems they are buried under an invisibility cloak somewhere. I will briefly summarize my opinions and observations below -- if you would like canon "support" I provided some "plot points" in those aforementioned posts, and am willing to stoke the fires again if necessary..... 1. Why was Luna introduced? Only JKR knows the real answer but here is my take.... a. to balance Hermione's hard logical opinions with her more emotional ones. b. to provide a possible SHIP (romantic or friendship) for Harry in Book 6 without getting away from the main storyline and turning the series into a soap opera. c. to provide a female character with similar experiences to Harry that he can identify with (deceased mother, imo soon to be orphaned), treated with suspicion by most of her peers, other traits that can be easily added to her personna (is her dottiness part of a spell?, etc.) d. to teach a further lesson on the evils and consequences of outcasting those who are different (if JKR so chooses). e. to provide a Stargirl (see Jerry Spinelli's excellent book) influence on Hogwarts and Harry. f. to pay homage to a character in The Little White Horse by Elizabeth Goudge, one of JKR's favorite books - I am in the middle of reading that now, more comments and observations when done. g. to provide Harry with someone to explore the MoM with, particularly the arch - I dont see Hermione going back there anytime soon (before graduation) if for no other reason in that it affects Harry so much. 2. Why was she given the moment with Harry? She was the last hope in getting his spirits up -- wasn't Dumbledore, wasnt Hagrid, wasn't his friends, wasn't the mirror, wasn't Nick --- then ... an accidental meeting with Luna, in one of the best chapters JKR has ever written ..... his emotions went from pity, to offering to help, to feeling a little better ..... not much but could be a start of Harry actually listening to what she has to say. Also this scene, along with the MoM sequence and her staunch defense of her dad has me convinced that her dottiness is artificially induced (canon in other posts) though everyone loves her spaciness.... dont be fooled. 3. Why is a larger role in store for Luna? a. She is defintely definitely definitely NOT ABOARD THE TRAIN LEAVING HOGWARTS -- for the fifth and last time I am posting this.... That is not an accident and will provide a continuous and seamless start for book 6 if JKR chooses to use it. b. Her dad has to answer for printing the interview with Harry in the Quibbler that started to open the eyes of the people that the Daily Prophet isnt the only "correct" voice in town.... Luna loves her dad more than anyone and if he were to be killed, Willard,... {oops, wrong scenario} someone would have to deal with a newly orphaned "fragile" young lady who now has a parental history that shadows Harry's {without all the Gryffindor heroics}. Her dad's death would signal the beginning of the second war in a very public and shocking way. c. she is the perfect ship for Harry without bogging down the plot - kind of like Ginny dating some guys who don't matter while waiting for Harry to come around to noticing her. d. i am not even getting into all the possible subplots with her mom's death as well as Remus Lupin.... Anyway, happy conjecturing .... Samnanya From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Thu Nov 6 23:21:03 2003 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:21:03 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Deck_The_Walls_With_Heads_Like_Dobby=92s_(filk)?= Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84245 Now that Xmas approaches...... Deck The Walls With Heads Like Dobby's To the tune of Deck the Halls Dedicated to Gail Bohacek THE SCENE: 12 Grimmauld Place, a few decades ago. The BLACKS gather together for another festive Yuletide THE BLACK FAMILY "Deck the walls with heads like Dobby's," Fa la la la la la la la la Shriek the portraits in the lobby Fa la la la la la la la la A dark potion we will mix well Fa la la fa la la fa la la As a gift for Bellatrix L. Fa la la la la la la la la Play the tuneful music box, we Fa la la la la la la la la Gifts for boggarts and the doxies Fa la la la la la la la la Christmas day will be so joyous Fa la la fa la la fa la la If blood traitors don't annoy us Fa la la la la la la la la House-elves bearing heavy tea trays Fa la la la la la la la la To the Mudbloods we will betray Fa la la la la la la la la Here's a gift for Muggle neighbors Fa la la fa la la fa la la We'll behead them with our sabre Fa la la la la la la la la - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu Nov 6 23:21:37 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 18:21:37 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: First name adressing = same House? + Snape the Vampir... Message-ID: <161.27b7dc8e.2cdc3181@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84246 In a message dated 11/5/2003 11:00:08 PM Eastern Standard Time, annemehr at yahoo.com writes: And there's no way I think Hagrid could have been in Slytherin. He's just not the Slytherin type. It's just that Riddle was charming to people all over the school, in case he needed to make use of them. *** Sherrie here: Actually, JKR has stated in at least one interview (Barnes & Noble, 10/20/02) that Hagrid was a Gryffindor - so sayeth the Lexicon. Also - did Riddle call him "Rubeus" in the book? (It's been a while since I've read that one.) I thought he called him "Hagrid". Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hermionegallo at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 23:47:41 2003 From: hermionegallo at yahoo.com (hermionegallo) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:47:41 -0000 Subject: Molly as written in the books In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84247 hg is compelled to respond. Let's try to bring this topic back round to the books, because we're all going to get too hotheaded otherwise. salit wrote: I also disagree with those calling her "non-working" mother. Raising 7 children is more than a full time job. And let's not forget that > > before going to Hogwarts her kids were at home full time and were > > almost certainly homeschooled (as I assume all children born to > > magical parents are). Kind of hard to go out and work at some > obscure MoM position while running a household of 9 with no house elves to do the work for you. Artcase wrote: >As in the case of many who choose her profession she will: 1)choose another project and use her freed time to devote to it, 2) putter aimlessly growing frustrated at her state of uselessness until it causes a rift in her home life at which time she will be forced to re-evaluate her persona, 3) Never realise the project has finalized and create sub-projects *such as meddling in her children's relationships, or grandchildren's lives* that help her hang on to the defunct project. hg replies: She has chosen another project. It's the Order of the Phoenix. (Furthermore, because this story is written from Harry's perspective, we have no way of knowing what other "projects" and "hobbies" Molly has, unless Harry hears about it or sees it in some fashion.) Certainly, no easy task raising seven children. Now that few of them can be considered children, is she actually "taking it easy?" Or is she involved in the Order? I don't believe that her role in the Order is limited to cleaning Grimmauld Place. At the very least, even if she isn't actively on-duty guarding the prophecy, for example, or bringing Harry from Privet Drive to Grimmauld, she is performing other functions such as keeping track of who is where, when -- and likely relaying information. She sets out meals for Order members as they come and go (they do need to eat) and is included in the meetings, which would indicate to me that her role within the Order isn't simply a token one. In that case, she would be off cleaning up after suppers instead of participating in the meetings. Artcase wrote: Her job, was mother, now she must shift into a different role. The boggart scene reinforces my opinion that Molly lives her entire life through her family and extended family. That is unhealthy. hg: Molly's job as mother is far from over. First, she will always be a mother to her children, no matter what their age -- but the dynamic of her relationships with them will adjust, as they have. She may suggest that Bill cut his hair, but she doesn't try to treat him like a child. Furthermore, several of her children still are children. They are older children, but still children nonetheless. It's within reason for Molly to have more authority about what they know and do. She doesn't try to keep her older children from attending the meetings -- only those who aren't "of age" as yet. We might interpret the scene in which she attempts to protect all of the big kids (from the explanations about what the Order's been up to) as her being overprotective or "molly-coddling." But if we look at that scene in conjunction with the hotly-discussed boggart scene, and see that her greatest fear is losing a family member, we realize that she's feeling a desperate need to protect whoever she can, in whatever ways she can. She knows, however, that she can't make her adult children or her husband refrain from fighting Voldemort, and that her authority over the older kids is waning with their age. It's hard to send your children out into the big, bad world -- even harder, I'm sure, when that world is so threatening. Artcase wrote: > So, in conclusion, I stand by my initial opinion that Molly is not an accurate portrayal of mothers and is a carboard symbol for what > JKR "wishes" her life to be. I believe that wish to be delusional and am calling her out on the fact, because IMO she should know better. I have read that she is a fan of psychology, if so, why can't she recognize her own mistakes? AND more importantly, why perpetuate the myth to a new generation? It is an injustice to them. hg: Molly is anything but a cardboard character. We can't assume that JK is writing a character that she herself "wishes" to be -- but knowing the books, we can certainly connect the dots and see that Molly is likely a mother figure that Harry needs. Time and again, he has greatly needed and appreciated the ways she expresses love and concern for him. There is no mistake in portraying a character with such a powerful mothering force. However, it would be a mistake to characterize this as a flaw. Molly may be imperfect, may sometimes overstep some parenting boundaries, but we see she's driven by love and desperation. I don't think there's any one message children of today should be getting in these books -- mothers who work outside the home aren't the only healthy and balanced mothers, and I don't get the impression from the books that Molly is unhealthy or unbalanced. JKR's not failing any responsibility to the minds of the young public. She's portraying rich, three-dimensional, strong and imperfect characters of all sorts. hg. From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 00:18:12 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 00:18:12 -0000 Subject: aargh! skip previous message Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84249 Blast it, I meant to send my last post directly to Del instead of posting it on the list. My sincere apologies. *heating up iron, preparing hands* From moorequests at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 16:48:52 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 16:48:52 -0000 Subject: sexism in the WW (Was I know Molly.....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84250 > Erin wrote: > > I think the WW is a lot less sexist than you're trying to make it > > out to be. My Dad used to repeat this old saying sometimes, "God > > made men and women, Smith and Wesson made them equal". Magic pretty > > much levels the playing field, wouldn't you say? And it's not a > > recent invention, it's something they've always had. I don't think > > there's too much wife-beating going on in the WW. Look at the > > founders of Hogwarts, however-many hundreds of years back. Half of > > them were female, so that should tell you something right there. No, > > if there is sexism in the WW, it would be imported from the contact > > they've had with muggles. > > Carol wrote: > > I agree with most of what you've said. There does seem to be > very little sexism in the working portion of the WW (and Molly's > decision to be a stay-at-home mom with lots of kids is her own > choice). But it appears from Harry's glimpse of Snape's memories in > the Pensieve that Severus's father was extremely abusive and both his > wife and his little son were terrified of him. That's an individual > instance of a man dominating a woman and a child, I realize, but it > has nothing to do with the influence of the muggle world. It is interesting (and I picked this up on first reading) that when they're in the kitchen of Grimmauld Place, and Molly's getting dinner, just like she always does, Tonks is the only auror who springs up and asks what she can do to help. This is after Tonks had a really long, hard day, too. I notice women in both the Wizarding World and the Muggle World tend to assume responsibility for the care and feeding of their families... and Tonks is even unmarried. Hermione knitting the hats in book 5 also brought this up for me. I'm not talking about blatent sexism here, but latent, and sometimes that's harder to ferret out and realize rather than the other kind. -M.M. From moorequests at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 17:01:06 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 17:01:06 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84251 Artcase wrote: > > So, in conclusion, I stand by my initial opinion that Molly is not > an > > accurate portrayal of mothers and is a carboard symbol for what > > JKR "wishes" her life to be. I believe that wish to be delusional > and > > am calling her out on the fact, because IMO she should know better. > I > > have read that she is a fan of psychology, if so, why can't she > > recognize her own mistakes? AND more importantly, why perpetuate > the > > myth to a new generation? It is an injustice to them. Siriusly Snapey Susan: > I'm sorry, but this really struck a nerve with me. First, what > evidence can you point to that this is how JKR "wishes" her life to > be? > > Second, and more importantly to me, why does JKR owe anybody > anything? She writes books. That is what she does. She writes them > the way she wants to and creates the characters she wants to. If we > don't like them, that's fine...and we don't have to purchase or read > her books. But why say/imply she OWES anyone out here in readerland > anything? She doesn't! > Sorry if this seems "hot-headed". I don't mean it to be, but I just > feel pretty strongly about this idea that an author owes us readers > anything. [I realize you didn't use the word "owe" but, to me, it > was implied in the words "It is an injustice."] > > Have at me. :-) Susan.... I'm not going to "have at you" or the original poster, even though I disagree with both of you. Rather, I think a better way of expressing it is that I can see what you're saying, but I don't agree with you, I don't think you really see things through an author's eyes. For example: J.K. Rowling may not agree with many of her characters, but they're in there for a reason. Many authors put characters in books purposefully to illustrate a point; to show a viewpoint that they may not agree with- to generate discussion or to help their audience step back and examine their OWN prejudices. Authors DO owe their audience something, and that is one thing: honesty. Whether they choose to portray honesty in the form of a dislikeable character who has been warped by the prejudices of another, that's their choice; whether they choose to put in an overbearing mother whose choice to withhold information from her son and daughter, and that choice puts them in danger at the end of the story, that is also the author's choice. But it should say something about the character's choices. Mrs. Weasley is a consistant, well formed character. Like many people in real life, she is neither 'good' nor 'bad'- she simply is. She is drawn a consistant portrait of a motherly, worried, protective person. She makes both good and bad decisions in the books. We are allowed to view the consequences of each. The worst type of book, in my opinion, is a pedantic, overly preachy one. Thank God Harry Potter is not. -M.M. From oppen at mycns.net Thu Nov 6 20:10:43 2003 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 14:10:43 -0600 Subject: Malfoys on Weasleys Message-ID: <003101c3a4c7$46a3e860$374a0043@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 84252 One thing I don't think has been suggested so far as a reason for Malfoy spite toward the Weasleys: What if Lucius and Narcissa wanted more children, but couldn't have them for whatever reason? That could explain Lucius' attitude toward the Weasleys..."here I am, rich as Croesus, and I'd _love_ to have a huge pureblood family, but I can't! Meanwhile, here's this redheaded loser with his dumpy wife, and they're banging out kids like it's about to go out of style. It's not fair!" And Draco hears some of Daddy's comments, and remembers them...and spouts out with them at the Worst Possible Moment. From owlery2003 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 00:40:44 2003 From: owlery2003 at yahoo.com (Scott Santangelo) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 16:40:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin's Chocolate, WAS: Lupin's sense of humor (and a bun... In-Reply-To: <14c.2666aa6f.2cdc2984@aol.com> Message-ID: <20031107004044.35346.qmail@web60103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84253 Batchevra at aol.com wrote: In a message dated 11/6/03 6:15:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, liz at studylink.com writes: > > How would the fact that he had transformed the night before mean that he had to take the Express? I agree he probably did recently because he was so tired, but I don't think having to travel to Kings Cross, then sleeping in an awkward position for 8 hours on a train with a lot of rowdy kids would be easier for him than flooing into DD's office or apparating to Hogsmede and spending the day in bed at Hogwarts. I don't think being appointed at the last minute would make either of these options unworkable either. On the other hand, maybe he can't afford floo powder, and apparating takes more concentration than he can manage in his exhausted state. > Still, he did have the chocolate. But maybe he's just a chocolate nut (as many fic authors like to believe) and having it is yet another happy coincidence. Canon hasn't told us for sure, so I guess we'll never know. Maybe he just wanted to take the train to get an early gander at Harry. > > Liz > > > > I think that it was a combination of being appointed at the last minute, the transformation and not being able to afford somethings, is what put Lupin onto the train on Sept. 1. As you said, we don't know for sure because canon doesn't tell us. By the way, I looked up when the full moon was that year and it was at around 2 AM that date. Batchevra ------------------------ Also remember that Lupin is a member of the OOP. Very likely that DD had him take the train to keep a closer watch on Harry. It's a stretch, but I'll give Lupin credit for being a sharp DADA teacher to have a dementor-remedy handy (again, the OOP would probably know about the Ministry's decision to send dementors to Hogwarts, and DD never trusted the dementors . . .). Owlery2003 --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From abush at maine.rr.com Fri Nov 7 00:47:14 2003 From: abush at maine.rr.com (kyliemckenzie1225) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 00:47:14 -0000 Subject: SHIP: movie contamination Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84254 [Brian]had written > I was polling a couple of my students about their SHIPping > preferences. The thought occurred to me that my R/H SHIP > inclination, and SHIPping in general is a product of movie > contamination. Romantic prospects don't seem as salient in the > books. Steve Kloves is an obvious R/H-er and I think his > presentation of those characters has changed the way I read them in > Rowling's books. Character interaction in books one and > two seems > more matter-of-fact than the movie representations. then Joj responded >Before OoP, I thought R/H was going to happen. After, I became a huge H/H and nothing they might put in the POA movie this summer is going to change my mind! now kylie (me): Katie Couric asked JKR this very question in the interview done at the release of OoP. Katie asks if Harry and Hermione will ever get together, and JKR responds something like, "Harry and Hermione? No, no, no.....RON and Hermione...." kylie From kimberley42 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 18:52:06 2003 From: kimberley42 at yahoo.com (Kim) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 18:52:06 -0000 Subject: O.W.L. exams Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84255 In OotP, Chapter 28 ("Snape's Worse Memory"), US edition page 643, Harry sees in the pensieve that James and Snape have both kept their examination papers after Professor Flitwick collected their exams themselves: "Harry looked down at his father, who had hastily crossed out the L.E. he had been embellishing, jumped to his feet, stuffed his quill and the exam question paper into his bag, which he slung over his back, and stood waiting for Sirius to join him. "Harry looked around and glimpsed Snape a short way away, moving between the tables toward the doors into the entrance hall, still absorbed in his own examination paper..." In my experience here in the U.S., after an examination of such great importance, we students would have to turn in the questions as well as our answers. Why wasn't this the case with the above O.W.L. examination? Wouldn't anyone be concerned that students such as Fred and George Weasley, for example, would sell their exam questions to students of the following years? Or are the questions asked each year so wildly different from each other that there is no possibility that last year's questions would help? (Not that *I* would ever cheat on an O.W.L.!) ---Kimberley from Texas From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 20:46:26 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 20:46:26 -0000 Subject: About Neville's parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84256 -> > When Neville's mom approaches him and gives him the Droobles bubble > > gum wrapper, his grandmother mentions that she's given him > thousands, > > and Neville takes it and puts it in his pocket. Is this just > > significant that Mrs. Longbottom has lost her mind, or do you think > > she's trying to say something to Neville? > > > nkittyhawk: yeah... I thought that was a bit... I don't know... > disruptive of the scene. Almost as if it had been inserted there > *wink wink* for reasons JKR isn't going to reveal until later. Maybe > she is trying to say something to us (the readers) as well as Alice > saying something to her son. Of course, being crazy and all, it > would be a bit difficult to tell him coherently and directly. I just thought it was touching that his mother was trying to give him something and that he valued even a gum wrapper enough to keep it (and many others) because his mother had given it to him--and it shows a teeny bit of rebellion against his gran that he does so against her direct orders. It also seems to suggest that Alice associates him with the little son she had before she lost her mind, so maybe there's some slight hope for her recovery.(?) My only problem with the scene is how Alice came by the wrappers in the first place. Surely the healers aren't giving her Droobles Best Blowing gum, which, if I remember correctly, can fill a room with gummy bubbles. A challenge even for a house elf or a cleaning spell. (The scene is also important, of course, because it introduces Ron and Hermione to the fate of Neville's parents and makes Harry more aware of Neville as a person with his own burdens and sorrows. If he's part of Harry's mental world, he's part of the reader's as well, though of course we're not obligated to interpret what Harry sees and hears as Harry does. Neville ceases at that point to be a comic character and becomes a wholly empathetic one, at least for me.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 21:01:58 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 21:01:58 -0000 Subject: Tom Riddle's Origins In-Reply-To: <10f.2837c969.2cdb268a@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84257 > I don't think that Voldemort's comments about his mum are > there to make us feel sorry for him. This is just history > into the man and why he became what he did. Just as we discuss > Snape and Draco's childhoods, this is a brief glimpse into > Voldemort's. It also helps us to see some of the origins of his > Muggle-hating ideals. There has to be more to Voldemort's story. > Every book gives a little more on the backgrounds of others. I > think book six will open our eyes more to the powers and reasonings > of the Dark Lord. I, as a lot of people, have always thought that > he mirrored Hitler in many ways. I hope this isn't true. I hope he > is original. > Rowling makes the connection herself in an interview: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/fall00-bbc-newsround.html Still, Voldemort is in some respects an original character. I do like glimpsing his younger self and seeing how he developed into what he now is. The young Tom Riddle is very much a foil to Harry, a boy in a similar situation who reacted altogether differently. We see what Harry could have become but--and in fact still could (consider the fanaticism of Barty Crouch, Sr., on the side of "good"). All that's keeping him from becoming consumed by anger and revenge is his heart--in contrast to Tom, who seems to have been born without one. (I mean that figuratively, of course.) > As for Draco, as soon as he comes of age, I think he will be a lot > more interesting. ( Get your minds out of the gutters ;) ) I think > that he is holding back because he is still under the influence of > his parents and the watchful eye of the staff. Bring it on Draco! I > want to see Draco lose his mind and inflict his insanity on everyone. ;) > > -Tonks Exactly. Draco (if I'm right) will go in the direction Tom did, seeking revenge and even committing murder at a young age. I don't think he has Tom's intelligence or subtlety, though, and he also has the disadvantage of having already made his enmity toward Harry quite clear. Snape will have to keep Draco under control without blowing his cover. Should be interesting. Carol From jjpandy at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 21:03:25 2003 From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 21:03:25 -0000 Subject: More on Molly Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84258 Molly's character is the anti-Aunt Petunia. She is a caring mother to all of her children and to their close friends. She includes Harry at gift-giving occasions and worries about him when their is trouble. Molly is the kind of care-giver that young Harry never knew! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 21:18:24 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 21:18:24 -0000 Subject: How are we going to Kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84259 > Ok. A few questions. With the Dementor's under his control, were Voldemort to > be captured, do you honestly think a supporter would perform the 'Kiss'? > Furthermore, how do we know that something like that could even affect Voldemort? > Clearly, people have a hard time capturing him, much less his soul. Wouldn't > he have defences against the kiss ready? > > The truth is that I have racked my brain thinking of ways anyone could do him > in and make it stick. Voldemort is defiant in death. And, setting dementors > who were once and will be loyal followers on him isn't going to do the trick. > Perhaps DD knows of a way to lock his soul away for ever? > > Really, anyone have any ideas on how and if Voldemort will actually meet his > end? > -Tonks I don't think the dementors have any lasting loyalty to anyone. The problem would be getting Voldemort into a helpless state and making him momentarily happy so the dementors would want to suck the happiness out. But since Harry is the only one who can kill LV, I don't know how that could be the answer. "Brother" wands aside, JKR surely won't have her 17-year-old hero perform an illegal curse (AK), which would require him to be sentenced to Azkaban even if it's used in self-defense. (I could see Peter Pettigrew trying to kill Voldemort, but we know it wouldn't work because it's Harry who has to destroy him.) Maybe Voldemort will try to kill someone (Snape?) with the Avada Kedavra and Harry will cause the curse to backfire. That's the best I can come up with at the moment. Carol From HimemyaUtena at aol.com Thu Nov 6 22:40:46 2003 From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 17:40:46 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] How are we going to Kill Voldemort? Message-ID: <7BF07299.0D29AB0F.1E595A1B@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84260 In a message dated 11/5/2003 11:41:12 PM Eastern Standard Time, nymphadoraotonks writes: {Tonks} > The truth is that I have racked my brain thinking of ways anyone could do him > in and make it stick. Voldemort is defiant in death. And, setting dementors > who were once and will be loyal followers on him isn't > going to do the trick. > Perhaps DD knows of a way to lock his soul away for ever? [Me - Adrianna] Do you think the dementors are loyal to Voldemort? I don't really think they are. They did guard Azkaban after all. Locking away some of his most loyal servants who would have sought him out to help him. I think that they choose to be on his side because he offers them more victims. That will provide loyalty to an extent, but I think if it was apparent that Voldemort was the losing side, I don't think they'd show too much loyalty. He would, at that point, be just another snack. This is not to say that I think this is Voldemort's end though. I have no idea. I'm just hoping Harry doesn't die. Adrianna From jjpandy at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 23:35:53 2003 From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:35:53 -0000 Subject: More on Molly Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84261 I don't think my first message got sent through, but I've had time to expand my thoughts anyway. I have read the recent postings about Molly's role and the debates of her as a homemaker. Molly's character fills the role of the anti- Aunt Petunia. This privides balance to the universe of evil vs. good, but it also furthers the contrast between the two worlds that Harry lives in. Molly is the caring mother-figure that Harry never had in his life before finding out he was a wizard. Molly worries and looks after Harry's well-being from the moment she hears from her sons that he is on the Hogwarts Express. She includes him with family members on gift-giving occasions. She makes sure he is well-fed ("encourages him to eat fourth helpings")and fusses over him in a motherly fashion ("fussed about the state of his socks"). Plump, warm, nurturing Molly is the opposite of bony, cold, prison-warden Aunt Petunia. From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Thu Nov 6 20:21:31 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 15:21:31 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why is everyone afraid of Luna? Message-ID: <1d9.13c528b4.2cdc074b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84262 ? Why was Luna introduced? Why was she given the ? moment at the end of OOP with Potter? I have a feeling that Luna is going to prove herself more valuable in books six and seven. She has already shown that she has bravery- even if it did look like something she did 'everyday' in many instances. There are some good parallels between her and Harry. She is very misunderstood and seems to have a special gift- what it is, we don't know yet. But, the only reason to introduce her would be that she will have some significance later- like the Creevy brothers. I am really looking forward to see what happens with her and how her character develops. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 6 23:57:19 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 06 Nov 2003 23:57:19 -0000 Subject: Wormtail's silver hand (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: <002701c3838d$65d21500$7c95aec7@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84263 > > As to what Peter was doing during the raid on the Ministry in OotP? > > Who knows? But it was something important and we'll find out. Trust > > me LV doesn't give out *gifts* like a silver hand if he doesn't have > > an important use for it. > > > > Hmmm... Silver hand on a Wizard... Silver vs. Werewolves... > > Think Wormtail might be assigned to make an assassination attempt on Lupin? > > *hrm* > > Iggy McSnurd I notice that no one responded to this post, but I've been wondering the same thing, so I revived it. I realize that Lupin in his human form is apparently immune to silver (and actually strengthened by wolfsbane, which ought to be poisonous to a wolf if not to a werewolf), but the silver hand, which seems to have unusual strength as well as beauty, certainly seems like the ideal weapon to destroy Lupin in his werewolf form. In other words, I think Iggy is on to something. (I do think that Peter will die trying to save Harry, but that won't prevent him from going after Lupin first.) I'd appreciate your responses on this. (I'm assuming that Lupin isn't ESE.) Carol P.S. Do I get some sort of award for the longest non-run-on sentence in this forum? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 00:31:25 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 00:31:25 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84264 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Pen Robinson wrote: > > On Thursday, Nov 6, 2003, at 14:38 Europe/London, artcase wrote: > >> > > > > The boggart scene > > reinforces my opinion that Molly lives her entire life through her > > family and extended family. That is unhealthy. > > I'm surprised that you see it like this. I am certain that my boggart, > if I had one, would be the same - the dead bodies of my husband and > children. What could possibly be worse? > > This is not living one's life through one's family, this is loving them > more than anything else in the world. > > I don't mean to say that Molly is without fault, but I think you're > wrong on this point. > > Pen I agree with Pen. I also think it's quite possible that Molly's boggart is going to prove prophetic--not that I think Boggarts have prophetic powers but because her worst fear may well be realized. I think (fear) that one of her family members really is going to die, and worse, die unreconciled to his family. Remember her reaction when Percy returned his Christmas sweater (jumper?) with the package unopened? I'd much rather believe that Percy will return to his family having learned a valuable lesson in humility, but it seems more probable that LV (via Lucius Malfoy?) will put the breach between Percy and his family to some malicious use and there will be no return and no redemption. I think there's real grief in store for Molly, who took such pride in Percy, the son who obeyed the rules and never got into any trouble, the one she was so certain would succeed in the MoM. If that happens, if there's no way out for him except death, I hope no one will say that she brought it on herself by her child rearing methods. Percy's folly is his own, the result of his own choices. But Molly will blame herself if it happens, and her grief will be worse than anything Harry has experienced. There is nothing worse than losing a child. If she suffers that unspeakable grief, I'll cry with her, whatever I may think of her child-rearing methods or her career choices. Dementors? Mummies? Snape? Failed exams? Molly has the only really terrifying boggart in the entire collection, the only real, justifiable, fully human fear. Carol, who is sorry to get emotional in this post but is also tired of the Molly bashing From drednort at alphalink.com.au Fri Nov 7 01:07:30 2003 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 12:07:30 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin's Chocolate, WAS: Lupin's sense of humor (and a bun... In-Reply-To: <20031107004044.35346.qmail@web60103.mail.yahoo.com> References: <14c.2666aa6f.2cdc2984@aol.com> Message-ID: <3FAB8B02.32525.482B6C5@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 84265 On 6 Nov 2003 at 16:40, Scott Santangelo wrote: > Still, he did have the chocolate. But maybe he's just a chocolate nut > (as many fic authors like to believe) and having it is yet another > happy coincidence. Canon hasn't told us for sure, so I guess we'll > never know. Maybe he just wanted to take the train to get an early > gander at Harry. Being totally sappy - how about the idea that he just *wanted* to ride the train. He's suffered discrimination because he's a werewolf. He's apparently been poor, and maybe had quite a miserable time since he left Hogwarts. Being invited back there, may bring back good memories, and they could include riding the Hogwarts Express... they would for me! Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From augustinapeach at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 01:38:44 2003 From: augustinapeach at yahoo.com (augustinapeach) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 01:38:44 -0000 Subject: Why is everyone afraid of Luna? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84266 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dan" wrote: > (snipped) > Why was Luna introduced? Why was she given the moment at the end of OOP with Potter? Now AP: I'm still trying to sort through my own answers to your questions. But here are the beginnings . . . . My first reaction to Luna after reading OoP was that she represents Faith -- pure, unshakeable belief even when there is no solid "evidence." She speaks with assurance of Crumple-Horned Snorkacks (sorry about spelling - too lazy to get up and check!) and heliopaths and Fudge's persecution of goblins. I thought her conversation with Harry at the book's end was really touching because she gave him some faith that there is *something* beyond the veil at the point when he was most hopeless. ("Harry felt almost as though he had lost his godfather all over again in losing the hope that he might be able to see or speak to him once more. He walked slowly and miserably back up through the empty castle, wondering whether he would ever feel cheerful again." -- OotP, p. 862) (I overcame my laziness) I think Hermione and Luna serve as a wonderful contrast to each other. Hermione is Logic/Science -- everything can be studied, you can reason your way to a solution, things that aren't logical or can't be explained simply don't exist. Luna as Faith believes and accepts. I don't know that it was JKR's intention to set them up as opposites (my ideas on this may go back to discussions in a philosophy class several years ago). But I think it is appropriate - - Harry needs them both. From greatraven at hotmail.com Fri Nov 7 02:01:56 2003 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 02:01:56 -0000 Subject: O.W.L. exams In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84267 > > In my experience here in the U.S., after an examination of such great > importance, we students would have to turn in the questions as well as > our answers. Why wasn't this the case with the above O.W.L. > examination? Wouldn't anyone be concerned that students such as Fred > and George Weasley, for example, would sell their exam questions to > students of the following years? Or are the questions asked each > year so wildly different from each other that there is no possibility > that last year's questions would help? > > (Not that *I* would ever cheat on an O.W.L.!) > ---Kimberley > from Texas Sue B: I don't know about British exams, but here in Victoria, Australia, we have the VCE exams (Victorian Certificate of Education) and not only can you keep your exam paper, but copies of previous years' papers are available on the Internet, complete with answers, to enable you to practise. Of course, Hogwarts staff are not too lazy to change the papers every year. Even young witches and wizards are children and if they could cheat they probably would, just like any other kids! ;-) In a family the size of the Weasleys', older brothers and sisters would certainly tell younger siblings, even if they didn't have the papers. From erinellii at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 02:14:06 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 02:14:06 -0000 Subject: O.W.L. exams In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84268 "Kim" wrote: > In OotP, Chapter 28 ("Snape's Worse Memory"), US edition page 643, > Harry sees in the pensieve that James and Snape have both kept their > examination papers after Professor Flitwick collected their exams > themselves: > In my experience here in the U.S., after an examination of such great importance, we students would have to turn in the questions as well as our answers. Why wasn't this the case with the above O.W.L. examination? Wouldn't anyone be concerned that students such as Fred and George Weasley, for example, would sell their exam questions to students of the following years? Or are the questions asked each > year so wildly different from each other that there is no possibility that last year's questions would help? Erin: Think of them as S.A.T.s. Every year in RL they actually publish study aid books which are made up of previous S.A.T. tests. The questions on the next year's tests don't have to be wildly different, either. Knowing in advance the basic material that is going to be on a test isn't cheating. Now if a student actually brought on of these sheets with answers on it into the testing room, that would be cheating. But just using them to study by is not. I suspect you're thinking of "regular" tests in high school or college. For these, teachers often will use the same test papers year after year, and so it is forbidden to take the question paper out with you. Erin From nansense at cts.com Fri Nov 7 02:16:53 2003 From: nansense at cts.com (zesca) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 02:16:53 -0000 Subject: ny times on hogwarts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84269 An 870-page volume is afflicting young readers across the country with a new malady: the "Hogwarts Headache." http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/06/opinion/06WILL.html?th is that okay, elves? From greatraven at hotmail.com Fri Nov 7 02:24:21 2003 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 02:24:21 -0000 Subject: How are we going to Kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84270 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" < > > > I don't think the dementors have any lasting loyalty to anyone. The > "Brother" wands aside, JKR > surely won't have her 17-year-old hero perform an illegal curse (AK), > which would require him to be sentenced to Azkaban even if it's used > in self-defense. (I could see Peter Pettigrew trying to kill > Voldemort, but we know it wouldn't work because it's Harry who has to > destroy him.) snip> > Carol Sue B: Or maybe it will be Neville who will somehow finish off LV, unexpectedly? Why bother mentioning him in the context of the prophecy if it isn't going to mean something further on? :-) From tiamik72 at aol.com Fri Nov 7 02:55:21 2003 From: tiamik72 at aol.com (katie_wible) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 02:55:21 -0000 Subject: OoP: What was the Point of this Death? And Phineas ??s In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84271 > > And I was also wondering, when did Sirius get another wand? And all > the DE's that were in Azkaban too? I mean, the just couldn't waltz in > to Ollivanders. And if something had happened to Mr. Ollivander, I'm > sure it would be in the Daily Prophet.. > > >Luna > > Marianne Umm, why couldn't Sirius just waltz into Ollivander's? Oliivander seems curious, very curious :) He seems to know an awful lot about people, just from selling them their wand. I believe that the part about a wand choosing the wizard is very important, and Ollivander has so much knowlegde of these wands. I believe that he knows what the person is capable of, just based on the wand that they get. Who knows, but there is some magic to it. Also, Ollivander does keep in touch with Dumbledore. We know this because when Harry got his wand, Ollivander wrote Dumbledore to tell about the phoenix feather/Voldemort connection. For some reason, I get the feeling that Oliivander knows about the prophesy.(or at least something about it.) I have no proof, but I just feel it. If this is true, then it would stand to reason that Dumbledore tells him things. If that were true, Ollivander would probably believe Dumbledore if he said that Sirius was innocent and needed a new wand. He obviously trusts Dumbledore if he told him about Harry's wand. Store keepers don't usually check up on customers, let alone report to the greatest wizard of all time. From erikal at magma.ca Fri Nov 7 04:52:28 2003 From: erikal at magma.ca (Erika L.) Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2003 22:52:28 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP: movie contamination Message-ID: <01d701c3a4ea$f24952e0$4ea31a40@oemcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 84272 kylie wrote: >Katie Couric asked JKR this very >question in the interview done at >the release of OoP. Katie asks if >Harry and Hermione will ever get >together, and JKR responds something >like, "Harry and Hermione? No, >no, no.....RON and Hermione...." Erika (Wolfraven): That's one of those interviews that I keep hearing R/Hers refer to, but which I rarely see quoted word for word. So, without further ado, here it is: Couric: "Any snogging with Hermione?" Rowling: "Hermione and Harry?! Do you think so?" Couric: "No I'm kidding. Rowling: "Ron and Hermione, I would say, have more tension there http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2003/0620-dateline-couric.htm There's a huge difference between JKR saying "No" flat out, and JKR saying there's more tension between Ron and Hermione. That there's tension is obvious. That it will necessarily lead to a relationship is debateable. People have been debating shipping issues for years. That wouldn't be the case if there were a single obvious answer. Personally, I think JKR is just toying with us. To my knowledge, JKR has never emphatically put down H/H or any other ship for that matter. She has said that Harry and Hermione are platonic, that something's going on between Ron and Hermione, and so on. And while such comments may be clues, they could just as easily be misleading. I really see JKR as being quite sneaky; she's not going to give it away one way or the other. Just look at Rowling's comments on shipping from the June 19, 2003 interview with Jeremy Paxman (Newsnight/BBC ): JP: Unlikely pairings? Not Hermione and Draco Malfoy or anything like that? JKR: I don't really want to say as it will ruin all the fan sites. They have such fun with their theories - and it is fun, it is fun. And some of them even get quite close. I don't think she's going to tell us. Her comments hint at R/H, but any H/Her worth her salt will tell you that JKR's replies are oblique and just her way of throwing people off the trail. Brian wrote: > I was polling a couple of my students about their SHIPping > preferences. The thought occurred to me that my R/H SHIP > inclination, and SHIPping in general is a product of movie > contamination. Romantic prospects don't seem as salient in the > books. Steve Kloves is an obvious R/H-er and I think his > presentation of those characters has changed the way I read them As to whether the movies influence shipping, I have to admit that I saw the movies before I read the books. However, I still ended up as an H/Her and I find my evidence for the ship in the books. Anyway, just my two knuts. Erika (Wolfraven) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Nov 7 04:33:29 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 04:33:29 -0000 Subject: Molly as written in the books In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84273 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo" wrote: > But if we look > at that scene in conjunction with the hotly-discussed boggart scene, > and see that her greatest fear is losing a family member, we realize > that she's feeling a desperate need to protect whoever she can, in > whatever ways she can. She knows, however, that she can't make her > adult children or her husband refrain from fighting Voldemort, and > that her authority over the older kids is waning with their age. > It's hard to send your children out into the big, bad world -- even > harder, I'm sure, when that world is so threatening. Jen: I felt like the end of the "The Woes of Mrs. Weasley" chapter pretty much sums up the situation in OOTP (and possibly what we and Molly have to look forward to): "But Harry, closing his bedroom door behind him some ten minutes later could not think Mrs. Weasley silly. He could still see his parents beaming up at him from the tattered old photograph, unaware that their lives, like so many of those around them, were drawing to a close." sniff, sniff (OOTP, chap. 9, p. 178). Molly (Sirius, Dumbledore, etc., take your pick) must find it extremely difficult to face the prospect of a second war after the first one decimated so many of their lives. No matter what Lupin tells Molly to soothe her earlier in the chapter, that "the Order is better prepared"; how can they *not* look at each other and wonder who will be the next to go? Grimmauld Place must feel like a fox- hole, where every stress, every anxiety is maginified 100x's. And as a reader simmering in this pot with the characters, I couldn't help but feel like their faults and foibles were maginified 100x's as well. We (and Harry) got a good dose of life in wartime, part deaux, and it's not pretty. So Molly yells, Sirius sulks, Lupin becomes ultra-rational, Snape taunts, Dumbledore evades...the negative sides of the charaters come out to play. Everybody has a fall-back position when life gets tough and personally, I think Molly's attempts to control a stressful situation signify a normal human reaction. Yes, she has a tendency to boss, to control, to meddle. She also has to ability to love deeply, contribute whatever she can and to stand up for what she believes in. She sounds pretty OK to me :). From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 02:08:56 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 02:08:56 -0000 Subject: Malfoys on Weasleys In-Reply-To: <003101c3a4c7$46a3e860$374a0043@hppav> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84274 I'd thought the same thing. > That could explain Lucius' attitude toward the Weasleys..."here I am, rich > as Croesus, and I'd _love_ to have a huge pureblood family, but I can't! > Meanwhile, here's this redheaded loser with his dumpy wife, and they're > banging out kids like it's about to go out of style. I liked the "about to go out of style" part. heh. I had thought of something along the lines of "something money can't buy" regarding Lucius and more children. One possible solution of course would be magic, but what if for whatever reason, a curse for instance, that wouldn't work. My problem is you would think they would have potions and/or charms for that sort of thing. Then again, magic has limits in HP's world. Maybe, just like for muggles, some couples can use fertility treatments and others no matter what they try will never get pregnant or in this case pregnant again. Can't you just see it? Lucius and Narcissa spending pounds and pounds of gold only to finally have to accept that Draco will always be an only child. Another thing, how long did it take them to have Draco? I don't know if Molly and Arthur are along with Lucius and Narcissa, but if they are that would mean in the time it took Lucius to father one child. Arthur and Molly had had six. Lastly, and this is a bit of a stretch (or maybe not). In COS, in the shop at Knockturn Alley, Lucius didn't seem too happy with Draco. I mean the boy let a muggleborn out score him. In Lucius warped little mind, the Malfoys are superior to the rest of us. How dare his son let some muggleborn get better marks than him? Perhaps, Lucius wishes he had more children so everything isn't riding on Draco. I think one of his biggest fears is that Draco may let the family down in a big way. Afterall, if he can't have any more kids, then there's nothing he can do about it. I imagine that Lucius has some serious control issues and things beyound his control just kill him. Well, that would definately qualify as something he can't buy/bully/scheme his way around. Yolanda From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 03:23:59 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 03:23:59 -0000 Subject: Why is everyone afraid of Luna? In-Reply-To: <1d9.13c528b4.2cdc074b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84275 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > darkthirty at s...: > > ? Why was Luna introduced? Why was she given the > ? moment at the end of OOP with Potter? > > Simply put, I think because there is a time when children treat anyone 'different' as a pariah. Those awful middle school years, especially. I thought the part about her posting up a notice asking for her things back was especially poignant and meaningful. It really humanized those who are different, laughed at, the 'weird.' Luna sees the world in a different way. It's not necessarily bad. As for my own prediction, my own prophecy... I predict that she and her father come back from their little holiday in Sweden having caught that Crumple Horned Snorkak. ;) (List elves, this is not sarcasm.) -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Come Discuss Harry Potter through the Writer's Eyes: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 03:26:21 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 03:26:21 -0000 Subject: About Neville's parents, also Obliviate In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84276 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > (The scene is also important, of course, because it introduces Ron and > Hermione to the fate of Neville's parents and makes Harry more aware > of Neville as a person with his own burdens and sorrows. If he's part > of Harry's mental world, he's part of the reader's as well, though of > course we're not obligated to interpret what Harry sees and hears as > Harry does. Neville ceases at that point to be a comic character and > becomes a wholly empathetic one, at least for me.) > > Carol See, Neville never struck me as being comic... just tragic. And I have always thought there has got to be something going on there, something is just not right about how he's constantly... well, screwing *everything* up. There are people who are extremely forgetful, and there are those who are extremely clumsy, but I've never met anyone who's THAT clumsy and THAT forgetful. It almost seems like when I read the books, like it's almost highlighted, "Neville is VERY CLUMSY." Notice how he is also VERY FORGETFUL. I just thought, from book 1, even Neville's introduction to us is kind of like a warning. It says something like, "Neville was the most clumsy and forgetful boy Harry had ever met." Then the Rememberall is set off immediately after it's sent to him... I wonder if that's a sign of Neville's memory? my own theory about this all is that Neville's parents are eating the gum, it's causing major problems, and it's connected to the Obliviate charm. I think Rowling's trying to send us some major messages about the ethics of Obliviate and why it's wrong (Roberts and his family, and the many Muggles who appear to suffer some slight brain damage after having their minds wiped). Also, Gilderoy Lockhart and his spell damage. I think that either Obiliviate is being used, or a similar charm we aren't familiar with. I think it's all tied into the Muggle relations problem, and frankly, the Wizarding World's habit of simply wiping people's memories and thinking that Obliviate is a useful charm may have backfired on them. I just thought of something else, earlier this evening. Weren't Bode, Arthur Weasley, Malfoy Sr., and Harry all together in the Ministry of Magic that day in August? They didn't all interact and happen upon each other at the same time, but Harry was able to see that Arthur knew Bode, and that Malfoy knew both of them... (I'm trying to draw a connection here between Malfoy and Bode and a possible threat to Arthur.) -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Discuss Harry Potter and Rowling's writing style! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join From ktd7 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 06:16:54 2003 From: ktd7 at yahoo.com (Karen) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 06:16:54 -0000 Subject: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84277 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" wrote: > Molly's character is the anti-Aunt Petunia. She is a caring mother > to all of her children and to their close friends. She includes > Harry at gift-giving occasions and worries about him when their is > trouble. Molly is the kind of care-giver that young Harry never knew! Me: All the more reason for Harry to end up with Ginny eventually; it would make him a part of the big, loving family he never had before. Karen From foad at bway.net Fri Nov 7 04:02:35 2003 From: foad at bway.net (ab35ppw) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 04:02:35 -0000 Subject: How are we going to Kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84278 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" < > > > > JKR surely won't have her 17-year-old hero perform an illegal curse (AK) snip> > > Carol > JKR has already had Harry use an unforgivable curse when he used the Cruciatus Curse on Bellatrix in the MoM battle after Sirius was killed. I believe that Wormtail's silver hand will come in to play. This is both because Pettigrew has a life debt to Harry and also based on a theory I have been mentally kicking around. There is a great deal of symbolism from a variety of sources in these books, much of it Christian and biblical. There is a passage in Daniel chapter 8 that particularly caught my eye with regard to these books. In the King James version of the Bible, Daniel 8:22 through 8:26 talks about four kingdoms standing up out of one nation (immediately made me think of the 4 towers of Hogwarts). In the latter days of the kingdom "a king of fierce countenance and understanding dark sentances shall stand up". This obviously made me think of Voldemort. The passage goes on to say that "by peace he shall destroy many". This is analogous to the many people in the wizarding world who did not stand up to Voldemort, and who permitted him to gain power through their silence and complacency. In describing the downfall of this evil king, Daniel 8:25 says "he shall be broken without hand", or not by human hand. This made me think immediately of Wormtail. Not only does he owe his life to Harry, but he literally has a hand that is not human. As we did not hear anything about him in OOTP, we do not know how useful a silver hand could be yet. I wonder if it could block curses like the statue in the MoM battle. From thesparksiii at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 04:33:43 2003 From: thesparksiii at yahoo.com (thesparksiii) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 04:33:43 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84279 DOES JK ROWLING HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST GOOD-LOOKING GUYS? I would not dare measure the significance of this question, though I know it seems trivial. But who knows, with JK Rowling, "it seems" is not really advisable, or to rephrase, it's not safe to assume because you just don't have a clue of what is significant and what is not. And I think this is an interesting question: What do Gilderoy Lockhart, Cedric Diggory, and Sirius Black have in common (aside from being all male, duh!!!)? On the bright side, they do possess pretty faces (although Sirius Black's face was described as "gaunt" due to the years of detention in Azkaban, nevertheless, he still has vestiges of good looks and was described really handsome during his teenage years, as was seen in the pensieve) that made them horded by girls. But on the other side, their awful fates resemble. Which made me wonder whether JK Rowling have anything against good-looking guys. We all know what happened to these poor guys. However, I still want to enumerate and elaborate: CEDRIC DIGGORY- killed without much ado as if he's not that important (and probably he's not really that important after all); his death merely gave us an idea of how cold-blooded, pitiless homicidal maniac Voldemort is. SIRIUS BLACK- spent many years of his life in Azkaban for the crime he never committed, escaped only to hide with a moronic house-elf in the home he detested (although he transformed it into a lair for the Order of the Phoenix, which by the way, made him feel worse because he started to think he's useless) and went out to save Harry at his life's cost GILDEROY LOCKHART- ended up in St. Mungo's Hospital for his malfunctioning brain, thanks to Ron, of course! Yes, he's the only one in Harry Potter series with good looks, who lasted and survived alive so far. But worse than dead, he has a spoiled memory Now let me ask again: Does JK Rowling have anything against good- looking guys? Or was it purely coincidental? Let's just see and we better watch out for the next guy who will be described as "handsome" for something terrible might come his way. From thesparksiii at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 04:58:12 2003 From: thesparksiii at yahoo.com (thesparksiii) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 04:58:12 -0000 Subject: TIPS ON WORKING OUT CLUES IN THE HARRY POTTER SERIES Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84280 TIPS ON WORKING OUT CLUES IN THE HARRY POTTER SERIES Do you want few important tips on how to figure out significant stuff hidden in the books??? Check out some of the patterns I have noticed about the manner JKR gives clues while I was reading the books: First, look closely at the statement following the phrase "AS THOUGH." I used to pay a little attention with them before, assuming that it was just part of the way JKR describes the situation so as to give the readers a clear idea or picture of the things around. Little did I know that most of the statements following that phrase (as though) are giving away an awful lot of highly significant ideas of what might happen. Here are few examples, excerpts, actually, from the HP books: 1. In Chapter 4 of Book 5 p.60 (American ed., hardbound) "The others' hushed voices were giving Harry an odd feeling of foreboding; it was AS THOUGH they had just entered the house of a dying person." See! How huge a clue that was! It actually gave us an idea of who might die. 2. In Chapter 9 of Book 4 p.124 (American ed. Hardbound) "Winky the house-elf was fighting her way out of a clump bushes nearby. She was moving a most peculiar fashion, apparently with great difficulty; it was AS THOUGH someone invisible were trying to hold her back." See again! And in the end, there was really someone invisible holding her back, Barty Crouch, who was one of the main, but secret villain in Book 4. And there are numerous AS THOUGHs you can find in the books that give out important statements. You can check out lot of the others yourself. Second, watch out for what seems like only a couple of uninteresting descriptions of situations that we barely notice. Most of the time you can snatch hidden valuable facts from there. I've learned in reading HP that you have to focus on the description more than what the characters are saying: Examples again: 1. In Book 3, while Harry was reading and looking at the newspaper sent by Ron during his vacation in Privet Drive about the fortune their family got, everyone in the photograph was described, including Scabbers, mentioning that it looked sickly and missing a toe. It turned out that Scabbers was important part of the story and the toe missing was a marking of Peter Pettigrew. 2. In Book 5, when they were hurrying to get down to the courtroom for Harry's hearing, he accidentally ran into the windowless corridor leading to the Department of Mysteries, but Mr. Weasley grabbed and lead him the other way. At first, it looked like JKR was just describing the surroundings, but it turned out that that it was the corridor haunting his dreams. 3. In Book 1, on the train to Hogwarts they've actually read the name Nicholas Flammel at the back of the Chocolate Frog Card featuring Albus Dumbledore. It seemed to be some kind of description only. But later in the story, they worried about where to find his name, which is an important piece of information about the Sorcerer's Stone as he was one of the brainchild of it. Last, DIVERSION. In the middle of an exciting scene, JKR slips in important stuff that is quite immaterial on what's exciting and tension-filled that is happening, we tend to overlook it. Examples for the last time: 1. When Hermione saw Snape in some kind of a trance, she hurried toward him, knocked Quirrel out on her way and set Snape's robe on fire. I was focusing so much on how Hermione would stop Snape and of course, I was hating Snape thinking that he was trying to kill Harry that I did not notice the Quirrel part, who was the one actually trying to kill Harry. 2. The beetle, Rita Skeeter. During the Yule Ball I never noticed the beetle on the statue because I'm very much concentrating on what Hagrid was saying to Madam Maxime. Hagrid was finally talking about his mother so who would give a damn about the beetle. Then it appeared again on Hermione's hair while there were so much commotion in the aftermath of the second task. Then up in the divination tower, it appeared again, or was described to be there as it was buzzing while we focus on Harry howling in pain. 3. Book 2, in the Flourish and Blott's. While there is a row going on between Mr. Weasley and Lucius Malfoy, little did we know that Malfoy was actually slipping in Tom Riddle's diary in Ginny's book. We are so much focused on the tension between Mr. Weasley and Lucius. Those are just some of my tips on how to work out clues in the story. I hope find it helpful. And you can add more of your own tips on working out clues. Or you can add more examples for the tips aforementioned. From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 05:06:38 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 05:06:38 -0000 Subject: Link to Jenny's message and my response Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84281 This post is a response to this post: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80592 Which is Jenny's original theory about Neville's parents. Due to it's length, I've been requested to just post the link, as I'm doing. My response: This is a theory which we came up with on another list, which > naturally arose from our discussions, just a month or so after you > posted this, however, I have a few more things to add to it, if > you're interested... > > First of all, there is the extremely important fact that candy has > been established and proven to carry a charm in the past, and more > importantly (and ironically) Neville was one of the very first > (somewhat unwitting) testers of Fred and George's experimental > charmed candy. The Canary Cream! > > Then again, you may want to mention the Obliviate Charm and its > effects upon people. They appear dazed, their minds wiped, confused > about time and place, after multiple doses of the spell. (Roberts and > his family?) I don't know if the Imperious Charm would really be as > effective as a good strong, mind-wiping Obliviate. A skilled > Obliviator seems to be able to wipe certain memories while leaving > others intact (Marietta seemed to be fine after Kingsley wiped her > mind of 6 months of D.A. classes...) but people not trained as > aurors, when using Obliviate, can 'break' minds. Like Crouch, Sr. did > to Bertha Jorkins. Or perhaps that was because Jorkins fought against > Obliviate? > > What got us started on this discussion on the other list was, in > fact, the ethics of Obliviate, and how it works. I think there's a > good deal of evidence that that IS the spell at work on the > Longbottoms, through the Droobles gum. I think they are chewing the > gum, and that the absence of the bubbles is either a mistake, or, if > you want to give her the benefit of the doubt, say that Obliviate is > so powerful and long lasting (because it is) that they only need chew > it every month or so for the effect. > > Neville himself can't visit them that often, and yet he shows such > remarkable signs of memory loss and forgetfulness. Even before this > theory was formulated, even before I read the prophecy, I had > suspicions that there was something going on with Neville. He is not > a squib, but something makes him act like one- yet he has magical > talent. When he got on the broom the first time, it shot straight up > in the air. Whatever charm it is, it's potent. > > -M.M. From oppen at mycns.net Fri Nov 7 06:37:12 2003 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 00:37:12 -0600 Subject: Luna and the Crumple-Horned Snorkack Message-ID: <009901c3a4f9$93f62560$e7560043@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 84282 I'd still like to know why everybody seems so terribly sure that no such creature as the Crumple-Horned Snorkack exists. Admittedly, Luna's not the best person around to convince people of their reality, but compared to a lot of the really weird critters in _Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find Them,_ it sounds almost mundane. From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Fri Nov 7 06:42:41 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 06:42:41 -0000 Subject: TIPS ON WORKING OUT CLUES IN THE HARRY POTTER SERIES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84283 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "thesparksiii" wrote: > TIPS ON WORKING OUT CLUES IN THE HARRY POTTER SERIES > > Do you want few important tips on how to figure out > significant stuff hidden in the books??? > > Check out some of the patterns I have noticed about the > manner JKR gives clues while I was reading the books: > > First, look closely at the statement following the > phrase "AS THOUGH." I used to pay a little attention with them > before, assuming that it was just part of the way JKR describes the > situation so as to give the readers a clear idea or picture of the > things around. Little did I know that most of the statements > following that phrase (as though) are giving away an awful lot of > highly significant ideas of what might happen. Here are few > examples, excerpts, actually, from the HP books: > > Second, watch out for what seems like only a couple of > uninteresting descriptions of situations that we barely notice. Most > of the time you can snatch hidden valuable facts from there. I've > learned in reading HP that you have to focus on the description more > than what the characters are saying: Examples again: > > Last, DIVERSION. In the middle of an exciting scene, JKR slips in > important stuff that is quite immaterial on what's exciting and > tension-filled that is happening, we tend to overlook it. Examples > for the last time: > > Those are just some of my tips on how to work out clues in the > story. I hope find it helpful. And you can add more of your own tips > on working out clues. Or you can add more examples for the tips > aforementioned. Sorry, I had to skip the examples you give. But BRAVO, it's very relevant! In baroque itterature, it's called "mislead with the truth". And it's also usual in Alchemy, if I understand well the book I'm reading currently. I think I'm going to read my Harry Potter books again, with your post handy. Amicalement, Iris From yswahl at stis.net Fri Nov 7 08:16:20 2003 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 08:16:20 -0000 Subject: TIPS - and traps - IN WORKING OUT CLUES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84284 thesparksiii ============= TIPS ON WORKING OUT CLUES IN THE HARRY POTTER SERIES First, look closely at the statement following the phrase "AS THOUGH." , Second, watch out for what seems like only a couple of uninteresting descriptions of situations that we barely notice. Last, DIVERSION. In the middle of an exciting scene, JKR slips in important stuff that is quite immaterial on what's exciting and tension-filled that is happening, we tend to overlook it. samnanya ============== Thats a great start! The only problem is that JKR is such a good plotter that there are literally dozens of clues scattered everywhere that support all kinds of different conclusions. The goal of any good author is to keep the reader guessing. A reader who has finished the series can usually find the buried clues, even if the gleeful author doesnt actually point them out. However, in the process all the red herrings that were scattered along with the true clues are quickly forgotten. What makes fansites like this so much fun {as long as we dont take all this TOO seriously) is that there are clues for almost EVERY result we want to see -- for shippers, there is "canon" for every ship out there, HH HG HL RH RL NG NL and on and on ..... EVERY ONE of the above ships (except perhaps NL) have several "clues" planted so that the alert reader will say AHA! I KNEW IT! THAT IS WHAT HAD TO HAPPEN! - if and when it does. I have conjectured on the "Who REALLY killed Sirius" theme and have mentioned several canon clues ..... the important thing to remember is that "It aint necessarily so!" - just because there are clues doesn't mean it has to happen! However, without the clues, if Lupin did kill Sirius, the reader would go "Aw cmon! You've gotta be kidding me!"; with the clues, if Lupin did kill Sirius, then the reader cant say that it was beyond the realm of possibility because we haven't always read what we thought we read {remember the muggles eyewitness accounts of Pettigrew's death?} The only method that is guaranteed to lead to failure is the "too critical to the plot/Harry" trap. JKR is in the business of providing a good read -- and suprises are essential to her achieving that goal. Characters seemingly on the verge of failure in a mission always make for a great read. A predictable book is usually a boring book and if it ends up all being a dream .... That said, here is what I believe should NOT be assumed - Harry must live Dumbledore must die Anything whatsoever about Snape The Ministry is on the side of good/evil Lupin cannot be evil {FINH i.e. Fill in name here} is too important to die {FINH} and {FINH} are (dear friends/mortal enemies) except for "Draco/Harry are dear friends" with no redeeming canon for a friendship that I have seen in any of the 5 books. There are entirely too many living Weasleys walking around, so {one/a bunch} of them has to die Hogwarts must endure forever Luna is too dotty to be an important character (yeah, right, just look at Neville...} Flitwick {the champion duelist-look out Yoda!} and/or Sprout are just there for color and since they havent done anything yet they won't Slytherin can be redeemed Anyone who is dead stays dead (that return of Diggory's body to his parents bit makes me wonder if they arent all vampires... but what about the effect of AK on vamprires? hmmm I am getting a headache, and i am not even mentioning S-.} and finally, You cant apparate in Hogwarts (its been said so many times by so many different characters that I am suspicious, but thats me) Happy clue hunting! From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Fri Nov 7 08:20:17 2003 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 08:20:17 -0000 Subject: Lupin's Chocolate, WAS: Lupin's sense of humor (and a bun... In-Reply-To: <20031107004044.35346.qmail@web60103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84285 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Scott Santangelo wrote: > Also remember that Lupin is a member of the OOP. Very likely that DD had >him take the train to keep a closer watch on Harry. It's a stretch, but >I'll give Lupin credit for being a sharp DADA teacher to have a >dementor-remedy handy (again, the OOP would probably know about the >Ministry's decision to send dementors to Hogwarts, and DD never trusted >the dementors . . .). > Also keep in mind that the OOP was reformed two books later, and wouldn't have been meeting at the time. OTOH, Dumbledore definately knew (as the ministry asked his permission to station the Dementors around the school grounds), and I'm sure he would have owled Lupin... --Arcum From darkthirty at shaw.ca Fri Nov 7 08:26:23 2003 From: darkthirty at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 08:26:23 -0000 Subject: Luna doesn't wear silk, and replies to other Luna threads Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84286 to SILK GOWNS One of the shortcomings of SILK GOWNS (in reference to Luna) is that it posits a "suspicious by nature" person (not particularly canonic), one with a penchant for decoding (not in any way canonic - a penchant for reading the Quibbler, whether or not it involves runes or codes, does not translate to a penchant for decoding), and one who "doesn't need outside confirmation to believe something." In fact, it seems Luna rather believes precisely what her father prints. Her "beliefs" come from a very peculiar, rather lonely place, where the Quibbler represents safety, family, even, and quite possibly her future (that is, running the paper). The people who write for the Globe or what have you, I doubt they believe a tenth of what they scribble. We don't know much about Luna's father, so we don't know if his planned trip to Sweden is really to look for Snorkacks or is a secret tryst unbeknownst to Luna or whatever. But Luna takes the stories at face value, and not because she's stupid, she's not at all, but because the paper also represents the possiblity that her mother is not beyond reach, at some point. This is Luna's weakness - her Erised.Don't get me wrong, however, I love the character - she is quite my favourite. The interaction with Potter at the end of OOP, however, is very clearly meant to reflect, to echo, the readers' confusion about the veil. As a plot device, it might function as some fancy, but uncommon and unlikely, robe, or detergent, but in terms of the development of the series, it is a moment of pathos wherein Potter not only finds something to replace, to some extent anyway, the emptiness by the lake, but finds his "unthinking" response validated by someone else. This has not happened before. In fact, it is quite a melancholy scene. to ali "She helps Harry to accept things that he knows but is not able to express or even understand," says ali. But how is this done? Predescent? Accident? Is it her so-called personality? Or, as I suggest, is it that Lovegood hails from the same place where Potter is still in the closet, the RW? Some say Luna is a seer. But all the instances they cite from canon are straightforward, and don't depend on any "seeing" ability, unless Harry is also a "seer.". She sees Thestrals because she's seen death. She hears voices and Potter hears voices. Until now, Potter's decisions of the heart have been, in some ways, infallable, in the big picture of his development as an independent force, and his intellectual assesments have often been rather less fruitful. But, in some ways, this identification with Luna is apart from all that stuff. It is assailable, this willingness to aid and abet Luna's careful dance through her own loss, and yet right, too. I suspect that, strange as it might seem, there is one person in better need of a good cry than Potter. to Paula As for Paula's assertions regarding Lovegood being other than human, to some degree, I daresay the same could be said for parselmouth dark wizard stumper Potter. I mean, where did HE come from? Jen has duly followed up on this with her supposition of intuition's role in the development of character toward wisdom. to Granny Goodwitch Granny's idea that Luna is a catalyst for an integrated Potter is also quite natural to believe, I think. But I need to remind her that Potter's "rational, heroic" part is actually more like his "unthinking, good heart" part - as in the second task (and the third, with CD) - and that his rational part usually lands him in some difficulty, when it actually functions, right down to his expectations (a real no-no) with Cho. He doesn't, I should add, have such expectations with Luna. to Annemehr Annemehr's post, a very nice one, I must say, while alluding to the alchemy interpretations of Luna's role, doesn't stop there, which is good. But I wonder how effective her processing of her ostracism really is? Or, rather, I should say, if there's any profit in it, for herself? This would be my concern, with a RW person like Lovegood. Then again, what would be the cost of piercing the shell, if it could be done? The thing is, even thinkers like Annemehr can be taken in wholly by Luna's appearance. As much as I love her, there is something definitely wrong. If Luna is our passage to Potter, what does that say about us? to JMM JMM missed the point I was making, that scapegoating, or ostracism, are, to a large extent, effects of fear, like racism. And JMM's description of Potter as a typical, unthinking kid - I don't get that at all. Kids aren't typically unthinking. And besides, Potter's intellect gets him in trouble, or gets him precisely nowhere, more than his heart does. The anger is what gets in the way in OOP. to Susan Susan, however, dreads the Luna effect on Potter. Here is a good example of what I alluded to in my two Luna posts - the fear that Luna upsets the internal balance of the books - threatens to allow the RW in. I think, for the record, that that is inevitable. Grindelwald needs to be addressed, and the story has to find closure. Myself, I think Luna is a rather enchanting way to start that process. (And, also for the record, I'm a Potter/Lovegood shipper.) to Taryn Taryn calls Luna unassuming, which is accurate enough. Though, in the other meaning of assume, one might call Luna someone who lives on assumptions. to Marianne Marianne says Luna helps Potter see things from a different perspective. I would say, rather, that she validates some of his perspective, and he hers. to Samnanya Samnanya's posts I have read even when I wasn't posting. I will only respond, however, to the Hogwart's express part - that is to say, I agree. Luna was not on the train. This is an important fact. A couple months ago I conjectured that HP would run away, in his belief that it would attract LV to himself and leave his friends relatively safer, for now he believes he alone can defeat LV. I don't know how it would work, but somehow those two things, the running away (he'll get found and convinced to go back to Hogwarts, of course) and Luna's absence won't vacate my thoughts. to M.M. and Eric Oppen I've missed a couple posts, but I will add to M.M. and Eric that, whether or not Luna and her dad come back from their trip to find a Snorkak (or her father's tryst with some unkown character - lol) successful, the trip has some significance. From ffionmiles at hotmail.com Fri Nov 7 08:47:09 2003 From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 08:47:09 -0000 Subject: O.W.L. exams In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84287 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote: > "Kim" wrote: > > In OotP, Chapter 28 ("Snape's Worse Memory"), US edition page 643, > > Harry sees in the pensieve that James and Snape have both kept their > > examination papers after Professor Flitwick collected their exams > > themselves: > > > In my experience here in the U.S., after an examination of such > great importance, we students would have to turn in the questions as > well as our answers. Why wasn't this the case with the above O.W.L. > examination? Wouldn't anyone be concerned that students such as > Fred and George Weasley, for example, would sell their exam questions > to students of the following years? Or are the questions asked each > > year so wildly different from each other that there is no > possibility that last year's questions would help? > > > > Erin: > Think of them as S.A.T.s. Every year in RL they actually publish > study aid books which are made up of previous S.A.T. tests. The > questions on the next year's tests don't have to be wildly different, > either. Knowing in advance the basic material that is going to be on > a test isn't cheating. Now if a student actually brought on of these > sheets with answers on it into the testing room, that would be > cheating. But just using them to study by is not. > > I suspect you're thinking of "regular" tests in high school or > college. For these, teachers often will use the same test papers > year after year, and so it is forbidden to take the question paper > out with you. > > Erin Just a quick note - we are allowed to take exam papers out with us from exams in the UK - or at least, we were 10 years ago! We were allowed to do this at University level as well and rpevious papers were certainly available for revision. Ffi From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Fri Nov 7 08:50:59 2003 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 08:50:59 -0000 Subject: TIPS ON WORKING OUT CLUES IN THE HARRY POTTER SERIES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84288 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "thesparksiii" wrote: > TIPS ON WORKING OUT CLUES IN THE HARRY POTTER SERIES > > Do you want few important tips on how to figure out > significant stuff hidden in the books??? > > Check out some of the patterns I have noticed about the > manner JKR gives clues while I was reading the books: > Interesting... Another thing to watch is parallelism. JKR does throw in parallels to draw on, either to add subtext, or occassionally, to mislead. I don't think James flipping Snape over would have been nearly the same without the DE's scene in GoF with muggle-baiting. Also, one thing that cemented the Winky/Crouch relationship as being more then a normal master/house-elf relationship in my eyes was comparing the scene where Winky gets clothes to Barty Jr's trial: "M-m-master..." Winky stammered, looking up at Mr. Crouch, her eyes brimming with tears. "M-m-master, p-p-please..." --GoF, US hardcover, pg 158 "Father," said the boy with the straw-colored hair. "Father, please..." --GoF, US hardcover, pg 594 If I hadn't been looking up information specifically on Winky & Barty Crouch, that would have slipped totally past me... --Arcum From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Fri Nov 7 08:55:48 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 08:55:48 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84289 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette (also tired of the Molly bashing) says I got the chills just reading this, but it makes sense, and it works with my theory that it's Lucius Malfoy that will turn out to be the real threat. An old-school, with-your-shield-or-on-it matriarch like Molly could soldier through any of those boggart deaths except unrepentant!Percy. Maybe the "relationship at the heart of it all" isn't teen love at all, but mother/child. Molly was my bet for the big OoP death because that would be the most traumatic for the most characters, including Harry. This way is far more operatic in scale, and dark? Well, JKR did say it was going to get dark... I hope you're wrong, though. --JDR (crying already! where's my anxiolytic?) From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Fri Nov 7 09:05:21 2003 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 09:05:21 -0000 Subject: (Filk) "Somewhere I'll Clean" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84290 I'd like to thank Gail for the inspiration on this filk, as the idea behind it came straight out of some corespondence re: her filks of LSoH. I was giving suggestions, got carried away, and filked the whole song... :) This is to the tune of "Somewhere That's Green" from Little Shop of Horrors, as sung by Winky (Note: one or two lines were changed in the filk prior to posting, simply in the interest of good taste...): Somewhere I'll Clean I know Master Barty's the greatest But I've failed him, come the latest. So I got a blouse and skirt, And a matching blue hat. Still, I owe Master my duty Well, if not, then there's nothing to me. And I dream of a time When we can be together again. A cardboard box of my own. A tea cozy, folded, dyed pink. Laundry in the hamper, Dishes in the sink. I go to wash and dry them; Iron Barty's robes with steam; In Masters house, I'll be there, Somewhere, I'll clean. I rake and trim the grass. Master loves to brood and read. I cook like Martha Stewart, And obey the house elf creed. I dust all the furniture To keep it neat while unseen. In the pine tree scented air, Somewhere, I clean. Between my home cooked dinner And bedtime - nine-fifteen I tuck in Master Barty And act out scenes from "Midsummer Night's Dream". Oh, Barty must be lost without me But he's my Master, he knows best. He sends an owl to Mad-Eye Moody, As the sun sets in the west. A picture of the Crouch home In Quibbler magazine. Far from Hogwarts, I dream I'll go Somewhere and clean... From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Fri Nov 7 09:16:58 2003 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 09:16:58 -0000 Subject: [Filk] One More Curse Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84291 I'd like to thank Gail, once again, for encouraging me to post this filk. This filk has been sitting around for a bit, and was inspired by a thread about the differences between the US & UK versions of GoF. This filk is to the tune of "One More Night", by Phil Collins: Scene: Voldemort and Wormtail are in the Riddle House, discussing their plans. Voldemort: "One more curse.. .my faithful servant at Hogwarts... Harry Potter is as good as mine, Wormtail. It is decided. There will be no more argument... One more curse..." [Voldemort, singing]: One more curse, one more curse I've been trying oh so long, To let you know, let you know how I feel And if Potter is to fall, Just help me back, to gain immortality Peter, give me one more curse, give me one more curse One more curse, 'cos my plans can't wait forever Give me just one more curse, ooh just one more curse Oh one more curse, 'cos my plans won't wait forever I've been sitting here so long, Wasting time, in a body not yet grown And I was wondering, is there a better way, Then I thought, maybe I could make a clone Peter, give me one more curse, give me just one more curse Oh one more curse, 'cos my plans can't wait forever Peter, give me one more curse, ooh just one more curse Oh one more curse, 'cos my plans won't wait forever Give me one more curse, give me just one more curse Ooh one more curse, 'cos I can't wait forever 'Till you give Potter to me, I will always be with you And if you run away, I will follow you Give me one more curse, give me just one more curse Oh one more curse, 'cos my plans can't wait forever I know forever this time who'll take the blame If I see the failure of this plan But unless you change your mind, I promise I'll be here Provided you'll lend a hand Give me just one more curse, give me just one more curse Ooh one more curse, 'cos my plans wan't wait forever Give me just one more curse, give me just one more curse Ooh one more curse, 'cos my plans can't wait forever" [Frank Bryce plays a sensitive sax solo...] "But quiet...I think I hear Nagini... Nagini has interesting news, Wormtail." "In-indeed, My Lord?" "Indeed, yes, according to Nagini, there is an old Muggle standing right outside this room, playing the saxaphone..." --Arcum From quigonginger at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 10:58:00 2003 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 10:58:00 -0000 Subject: Filk: Willow Tree (also some Very Deep Thoughts) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84292 I was having some Very Deep Thoughts the other night, and it occured to me that life is like the Whomping Willow Tree. The key to solving problems it to go to the root of them and know which buttons to push. So I'm not Plato. Anyway, singing my Very Deep Thought is Prof. Remus Lupin, in the Shrieking Shack scene. To the tune of Lemon Tree by (among others) Peter, Paul, and Mary. Lupin: When I was just a lad of ten A letter came to me Inviting me to Hogwarts In spite of lycanthropy. "In this old Shack we'll hide you, son" Headmaster said to me. "And soon you'll find that life is like The Whomping Willow Tree." Willow Tree, stands serenely- What a vision of deceit. At the root of the old willow Hides the key to not be beat. (Repeat) So here, beyond the Willow Tree, My friends and I did lie. So arrogant about our powers As rogue anamagi. We spent semesters lost in fun Beyond the Willow Tree. The music of our laughter Hid the danger that could be. Willow Tree, stands serenely- What a vision of deceit. At the root of the old willow Hides the key to not be beat. (Repeat) But we grew up and told no one The mischief we had done. Soon Stag was dead, Dog was in pound And Rat was on the run. So, Sirius, my brother, Here's you're chance to get your due. We give the Rat to Dumbledore, Whose words were, oh, so true: Willow Tree, stands serenely- What a vision of deceit. At the root of the old willow Hides the key to not be beat. (Repeat) And they'd have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for that meddling Snape. Ginger, who sometimes wishes someone would hand her a stick and show her the knot. Peace, y'all. From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 03:43:37 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 03:43:37 -0000 Subject: Why is everyone afraid of Luna? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84293 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: > f. to pay homage to a character in The Little White Horse > by Elizabeth Goudge, one of JKR's favorite books - I am in > the middle of reading that now, more comments and > observations when done. > Would you mind pointing me and the list in the general direction of the interview where she told us this? I'm particularly interested in her 'literary tracks', since as an author, I know that anything we read in childhood will effect us greatly down the line. I was perfectly astounded to find how many parallels can be made between C.S. Lewis's Narnia and Harry Potter... I have made over 50 and am still making them. I have only found one cohesive parallel between Harry Potter and Tolkien (that is, a non-surface parallel, something that sinks deeper than just the basics), but there may be more there. That parallel lies between the Mirror of Erisred and the enchanted mirror of Galadriel. Both take the same fuction, if you think about it- mirrors that show the viewer an unknown potential- and he/she is unsure about what *exactly* that potential is, only that it can be realized. Both mirrors are dangerous. Both mirrors are seductive. But both could serve a useful purpose if you harness your emotions and can control your desire. As for the C.S. Lewis parallels... they're too numerous to count and the file is too big to be uploaded in text. As for other children's books... I was very interested to discover The Enchanted Castle by E. Nesbit, which had a few very interesting quotes about magic. If literary parallels really intrigue you, I have started a group for discussing them as they relate to Harry Potter. Anyone is welcome, but keep in mind it's not a general Harry Potter list. No messages will be censored, but we may bore those not interested in going into the minutae of a writer's life and J.K. Rowling's unconcious mind. It's here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join > g. to provide Harry with someone to explore the MoM with, > particularly the arch - I dont see Hermione going back > there anytime soon (before graduation) if for no other > reason in that it affects Harry so much. > Hermione is not interested in anything which makes her feel strange or out of control of her own senses. I think that's probably why she's a little disturbed about her feelings about Ron right now. She seems to be handling her relationship with Krum well... but I suspect that's because there isn't much behind it. But I have hopes that what is going on with Ron is a whole lot deeper. As for what happened with the arch, I suspect it disturbed her a lot because she could sense its eerieness, and that kind of thing freaks her out. It is not something she can solve or look up in a book. She is so very right- brained. Luna is the exact opposite. I hope they never have to collaborate on a school project. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ "if we ever want to achieve real peace in this world, we must begin with the children." -Gandhi From pen at pensnest.co.uk Fri Nov 7 11:42:33 2003 From: pen at pensnest.co.uk (Pen Robinson) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 11:42:33 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: O.W.L. exams In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <7A250D22-1117-11D8-A341-0030654DED6A@pensnest.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 84294 On Friday, Nov 7, 2003, at 08:47 Europe/London, ffimiles wrote: > Just a quick note - we are allowed to take exam papers out with us > from exams in the UK - or at least, we were 10 years ago! We were > allowed to do this at University level as well and rpevious papers > were certainly available for revision. > Ffi > OTOH, I sat A-Level English this summer and was not allowed to take the papers away. A pity, really. Pen From smaragdina5 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 05:04:44 2003 From: smaragdina5 at yahoo.com (smaragdina5) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 05:04:44 -0000 Subject: Why is everyone afraid of Luna? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84295 > Why was Luna introduced? > Why was she given the moment at the end of OOP with Potter? I mentioned two days ago that John Granger had a new article out, http://www.touchstonemag.com/docs/issues/16.9docs/16-9pg34.html on the alchemical elements in the series. Here are two excerpts: "The second stage is purification, usually called the albedo or white work...Frequently used symbols of the albedo stage of the work in pictorial representations and descriptions of it are the moon (Luna in Latin), the name of one of Harry's friends in the fifth book..." and more interestingly: "His new friend Luna is another alchemical symbol. "Luna is the bride, the white queen, consort of King Sol. She is the moist, cold, receptive principle which must be united with Sol, the dry, hot, active principle in the chemical wedding." A girlfriend for the hot and dry?burned to a cinder?Harry? Luna "symbolizes the attainment of the perfect white stage, the albedo, where the matter of the Stone reaches absolute purity." (Look for Harry and Luna to be a couple in the sixth book?much to Hermione's and Professor McGonagall's disgust.) Certainly, an intriguing read... smaragdina5 From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 7 06:57:07 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 06:57:07 -0000 Subject: Lupin's Chocolate, WAS: Lupin's sense of humor (and a bun... In-Reply-To: <20031107004044.35346.qmail@web60103.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84296 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Scott Santangelo wrote: > Batchevra: > I think that it was a combination of being appointed at the last minute, the transformation and not being able to afford somethings, is what put Lupin onto the train on Sept. 1. As you said, we don't know for sure because canon doesn't tell us. By the way, I looked up when the full moon was that year and it was at around 2 AM that date. > Owlery2003 > Also remember that Lupin is a member of the OOP. Very likely that DD had him take the train to keep a closer watch on Harry. It's a stretch, but I'll give Lupin credit for being a sharp DADA teacher to have a dementor-remedy handy (again, the OOP would probably know about the Ministry's decision to send dementors to Hogwarts, and DD never trusted the dementors . . .). > Geoff: Bear in mind that, at the time Lupin was on the train, the OOP seems to have been formally disbanded or informally on the back burner. At the end of GOF, Dumbledore sends Sirius off saying: "You are to alert Remus Lupin, Arabella Figg, Mundungus Fletcher - the old crowd.Lie low at Lupin's for a while. I will contact you there." (GOF p.618 UK edition) I think that Dumbledore (rather than the OOP itself) was keeping his ear close to the ground but it looks from that comment as if the old Phoenix members were having to be alerted and "recommissioned". Geoff From amani at charter.net Fri Nov 7 11:48:46 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 06:48:46 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: OoP: What was the Point of this Death? And Phineas ??s References: Message-ID: <005101c3a525$1a67f760$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84297 > And I was also wondering, when did Sirius get another wand? And all > the DE's that were in Azkaban too? I mean, the just couldn't waltz in > to Ollivanders. And if something had happened to Mr. Ollivander, I'm > sure it would be in the Daily Prophet.. > > >Luna > > Marianne katie_wible: Umm, why couldn't Sirius just waltz into Ollivander's? Taryn: Even if Ollivander's in the know about Sirius, all those people at Diagon Alley sure aren't. We all know Sirius wasn't allowed out in public, and for good reason. He was the most wanted criminal of the time. If Ollivander was part of the Order, I can imagine him bringing some of his stock to Grimmauld Place and fitting Sirius with a new wand. But we're not sure about Ollivander. ---------- Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 7 07:07:34 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 07:07:34 -0000 Subject: O.W.L. exams In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84298 > Sue B: > > I don't know about British exams, but here in Victoria, Australia, we > have the VCE exams (Victorian Certificate of Education) and not only > can you keep your exam paper, but copies of previous years' papers > are available on the Internet, complete with answers, to enable you > to practise. Of course, Hogwarts staff are not too lazy to change > the papers every year. Even young witches and wizards are children > and if they could cheat they probably would, just like any other > kids! ;-) In a family the size of the Weasleys', older brothers and > sisters would certainly tell younger siblings, even if they didn't > have the papers. Geoff: Speaking as a former teacher for over 30 years in the UK - for 15 of which I was the Examinations Secretary with responsibility for processing all the examination administration, it is standard practice to allow students to keep their papers and, often, as part of the courses, students will have booklets of past papers over the last three or four years to work through for practice and revision. Hogwarts, being based on British (or perhaps English) patterns probably has a similar policy on written papers. However, an interesting point which has just occurred to me is that Hogwarts staff are presumably responsible for setting and administering their own papers. Obviously in the real world in the UK, the examination boards for GCSE (the 16+ examination) and the GCE A-levels (18 year old) have standardised papers, marking schemes etc. Since Hogwarts is the only wizarding school in Britain, the standardisation of tests, setting of grade boundaries etc. must be more subjective. Geoff From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 7 07:21:38 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 07:21:38 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84299 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "thesparksiii" wrote: > DOES JK ROWLING HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST GOOD-LOOKING GUYS? > > Now let me ask again: Does JK Rowling have anything against good- > looking guys? Or was it purely coincidental? Let's just see and we > better watch out for the next guy who will be described > as "handsome" for something terrible might come his way. Perhaps JK is a Star Trek fan for there has often been speculation that the worst job to have in the original series was to be one of the strong silent security types wearing a red jumper. Now, who else is in the series at the moment who is handsome? Do JK's references to folk such as Justin Fitch-Finchley or Ernie MacMillan for example put them in that category? Place your bets, ladies and gentlemen. Geoff From pen at pensnest.co.uk Fri Nov 7 11:52:54 2003 From: pen at pensnest.co.uk (Pen Robinson) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 11:52:54 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: O.W.L. exams In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84300 On Friday, Nov 7, 2003, at 08:47 Europe/London, ffimiles wrote: > Just a quick note - we are allowed to take exam papers out with us > from exams in the UK - or at least, we were 10 years ago! We were > allowed to do this at University level as well and rpevious papers > were certainly available for revision. > Ffi > Oops - meant to follow up further. I think it may be unwise to try to translate the OWLs and NEWTs too closely into our own experiences. As far as I can tell, the OWLs match fairly closely with my experiences of O-Levels - which would have been roughly contemporaneous with JKR's. However, she may well have decided that for dramatic reasons, the system at Hogwarts is a little bit different - for example, the attendance of the external examiners. When I took practical parts of exams (ie oral tests, dictations etc in French and German), these were given by a member of the staff - anything else would be impractical. At Hogwarts it is feasible to have the examiners themselves in attendance to conduct the exams because the Wizarding World is small, and whether or not Hogwarts is the only school, there cannot be many pupils sitting their OWLs at any time. However, I expect JKR actually did this for dramatic and practical reasons - it allows her students to display themselves at their very best, with no question of biased judging. [My own theory is that Harry is actually quite a capable potion-maker, but it would be difficult for all sorts of reasons to allow Snape to award him an 'O', and this avoids the necessity.] NEWTs, from what we have gleaned so far, are not going to be directly comparable to A-Levels, though they have aspects in common. I think they will seem more familiar to English and Welsh readers than to Americans, but there's little reason to suppose that JKR has simply translated one thing directly into another. I spose what I'm trying to say is that it doesn't altogether matter what real-world practice is! Cheers, Pen From prlrocks at aol.com Fri Nov 7 08:11:53 2003 From: prlrocks at aol.com (prlrocks) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 08:11:53 -0000 Subject: Snape & Harry's Memory Perspective Question and then some In-Reply-To: <000901c3a249$b58aca30$54906751@yourq7fwqx3ncp> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84301 Never have posted here. Hope I do it right, lol. Alison wrote: Snape now knows that > the Sorting Hat thought that he (Harry) would have done well in > Slytherin house - i.e. that Harry has many of the qualities that > Slytherin approved of. Me (prlrocks): I'd love if this were true but do we really know it for a fact? Did Snape not only see Harry with the hat but hear what the hat said into Harry's head as well? Sorry if this has been talked about already. prlrocks From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 7 13:14:04 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 13:14:04 -0000 Subject: O.W.L. exams In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84302 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Pen Robinson wrote: > Oops - meant to follow up further. > > However, she (JKR) > may well have decided > that for dramatic reasons, the system at Hogwarts is a little bit > different - for example, the attendance of the external examiners. > When I took practical parts of exams (ie oral tests, dictations etc in > French and German), these were given by a member of the staff - > anything else would be impractical. > When I took French at GCE O-level - yonks ago - and a little more recently German A-levels, the situation was akin to Hogwarts in that the orals were conducted by external examiners. Geoff From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 14:07:58 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 14:07:58 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84303 wrote: Does JK Rowling have anything against good-looking guys? Or was it purely coincidental? Laura: If that's the algorithm, then Snape will live forever. :-) From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 12:56:19 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 12:56:19 -0000 Subject: Luna and the Crumple-Horned Snorkack In-Reply-To: <009901c3a4f9$93f62560$e7560043@hppav> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84304 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eric Oppen" wrote: > I'd still like to know why everybody seems so terribly sure that no such > creature as the Crumple-Horned Snorkack exists. Admittedly, Luna's not the > best person around to convince people of their reality, but compared to a > lot of the really weird critters in _Fantastic Beasts and Where To Find > Them,_ it sounds almost mundane. I think maybe it's everyone's reliance upon the printed word and media, how when you see something written in books, or on a televised news show, it is supposedly looked upon as *fact*. Yes, the WW doesn't have television, but they have the Wizarding Wireless Network, which we know very little about... so far, all we have been told is that it plays music, not news, though. So the W.W. has only two sources for news, one of which is regarded largely as a joke, and the other one is taken as absolute fact, even though they often appear to be lazy (not investigating the real causes of deaths, as in what happened to Bode), or in the pocket of the Ministry of Magic. (Forwarding the MoM's wish to discredit Harry Potter by playing on the assumption that his scar makes him unbalanced and untrustworthy.) As a writer, I often struggle with getting people to realize the incorrect assumption that if something is in printed media, it is no more true than if they wrote it down themselves upon a scrap of paper. I got a good kick out of the title of Al Franken's latest book, "Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them," and the lawsuit Fox News brought against him to block it. (The lawsuit was thrown out of court.) I summarize this situation in order to explain the lengths Fox News would go to in order to block or hinder this book. The legal battle between the two also brings to light a wonderful part of our world that the wizarding world doesn't have- checks and balances in the news and media. Thank goodness for the Quibbler, or perhaps the balance would never have begun to turn in Harry's favor at Hogwarts, and in the WW in general. Does anyone else wonder if the Quibbler will become more reputable because of Harry's interview? I know that the National Enquirer sometimes prints stories that surprise everyone and turn out to be true. I believe they first broke the story about Rush Limbaugh's drug addiction, exposing quite a bit of hypocrisy there. But from what I can infer from OotP about The Quibbler, I think perhaps it is better paralleled to Weekly World News than National Enquirer. Thoughts? -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Compare and Contrast Tolkien, Lewis, and Rowling! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 13:54:26 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 13:54:26 -0000 Subject: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84305 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Karen" wrote: > Me: > > All the more reason for Harry to end up with Ginny eventually; it > would make him a part of the big, loving family he never had before. Karen, You know, with the death of Sirius, I couldn't help but remember, basically, the only way for Harry to have a real family is through marriage. Sure, Aunt Petuna is related to him through blood. But relatives who would throw you out the second your life wasn't in danger...you're better off on your own, in some cases. In my opinion, the Weasleys are more family to him than anything he's got. And what would be more natural then for him to become a member of the Weasleys by marrying Ginny? There is a strong friendship between them now, which is the best thing to build a romance on. I seriously doubt that anything will happen until the end of the series, and then I think that maybe a future for Harry and Ginny might be hinted at. But I think it will end like that. I think, somehow, he is meant to fit into that big Weasly family. He belongs there. -M.M. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Current discussions: Is J.K. Rowling an apologist for boarding schools? The deeper meaning behind Padma and Parvati http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 14:04:46 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 14:04:46 -0000 Subject: TIPS ON WORKING OUT CLUES IN THE HARRY POTTER SERIES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84306 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "thesparksiii" wrote: > TIPS ON WORKING OUT CLUES IN THE HARRY POTTER SERIES > > Do you want few important tips on how to figure out > significant stuff hidden in the books??? > > Check out some of the patterns I have noticed about the > manner JKR gives clues while I was reading the books: > These are some astute observations, but unfortunately they are not limited or unique to J.K. Rowling. If you are extremely intrigued by this type of detection, I point you in the direction of the original author of this type of fiction, A.C. Doyle, author of the Sherlock Holmes short stories, and novels. You will probably be able to pick up some large similarities between her writing and his! Other detective novels use many of these formulas, but Doyle was the first. Though his stories are written first-person, and Rowling's third person omniscient, you will also be able to pick up similarities in the narrative tone. If you don't mind, I would like to ask your permission to repost this to my writer's group. We'd love to pick it apart there. :) -M.M. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Current discussions: Is J.K. Rowling an apologist for boarding schools? The deeper meaning behind Padma and Parvati http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Nov 7 14:34:54 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 14:34:54 -0000 Subject: Luna doesn't wear silk, and replies to other Luna threads In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84307 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dan" wrote: > Annemehr's post, a very nice one, I must say, while alluding to the > alchemy interpretations of Luna's role, doesn't stop there, which is > good. But I wonder how effective her processing of her ostracism > really is? Or, rather, I should say, if there's any profit in it, for > herself? This would be my concern, with a RW person like Lovegood. > Then again, what would be the cost of piercing the shell, if it could > be done? The thing is, even thinkers like Annemehr can be taken in > wholly by Luna's appearance. As much as I love her, there is > something definitely wrong. If Luna is our passage to Potter, what > does that say about us? > Jen: I don't understand what you mean when you say "with a RW person like Luna" and that there is something "defeinitely wrong" with Luna. You've alluded to the RW part before in other posts; are you writing a theory that includes information on your own thoughts? You seem to think all the posters so far aren't getting Luna "right" so I'm wondering your take on her in more detail. From erinellii at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 15:08:29 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:08:29 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84308 "thesparksiii" wrote: > > Now let me ask again: Does JK Rowling have anything against good- > > looking guys? Or was it purely coincidental? Let's just see > "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Now, who else is in the series at the moment who is handsome? Do JK's references to folk such as Justin Fitch-Finchley or Ernie MacMillan for example put them in that category? Place your bets, ladies and gentlemen. Erin: Bill! Bill springs immediately to my mind. And the Malfoys, father and son. As for what she might have against good-looking guys, her first husband I believe was fairly hot. Her current one has been described as looking somewhat like Harry, lol. Erin From artcase at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 15:24:43 2003 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:24:43 -0000 Subject: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84309 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" wrote: > I don't think my first message got sent through, but I've had time to > expand my thoughts anyway. > > I have read the recent postings about Molly's role and the debates of > her as a homemaker. Molly's character fills the role of the anti- > Aunt Petunia. This privides balance to the universe of evil vs. good, > but it also furthers the contrast between the two worlds that Harry > lives in. Molly is the caring mother-figure that Harry never had in > his life before finding out he was a wizard. Molly worries and looks > after Harry's well-being from the moment she hears from her sons that > he is on the Hogwarts Express. She includes him with family members > on gift-giving occasions. She makes sure he is well-fed ("encourages > him to eat fourth helpings")and fusses over him in a motherly fashion > ("fussed about the state of his socks"). Plump, warm, nurturing > Molly is the opposite of bony, cold, prison-warden Aunt Petunia. Art here: If Molly is the "anti-Aunt Petunia" then why does Aunt Petunia represent a stay at home mom as well? And please don't tell me that Aunt Petunia isn't guilty of the same vicarious-give-her-all-for-her- children (in this case, Duddykins) Poof that Molly does. I can take the disagreeing posts that think I am wrong for insisting that people represent Today's world in their books, that is fine. BUT I still think it is an injustice to millions of children readers, especially female ones, to only show fleshed out mom characters that are stay at home moms. The real world does not work like that and shouldn't IMO. IF women really want to be equal they should stop thinking in terms of "stay at home mom" and in terms of Project Management. Men, take a lesson too. If you define yourself as what you do, when what you do is done, you are left with no persona. Psychologically this is unhealthy and causes much more grief in this world than necessary. There is no equality as long as people still believe a woman's place is in the home. A point in my initial post was: Why couldn't Sirus be viewed as a single, non-conventional Dad? You don't see this? You don't see the equality of sexes being undermined on two levels? Apologies to all who take offence. Shutting up on the subject now. Art From artcase at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 15:34:48 2003 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:34:48 -0000 Subject: TIPS - and traps - IN WORKING OUT CLUES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84310 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: ...snip... > and finally, > You cant apparate in Hogwarts (its been said so many > times by so many different characters that I am > suspicious, but thats me) > > Happy clue hunting! Art here: I am also convinced on the last point. Someone, Voldemort, Harry, Hermione, Neville, Luna or maybe Ron (although he's the long-shot) will figure out a way to apparate in Hogwarts. Question regarding house elves. If there IS no apparation/disapparation in Hogwarts, what do house elves do? (think Dobby snapping fingers and then he was gone) Do they "shimmer"/"orb"? From tminton at deckerjones.com Fri Nov 7 15:39:31 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:39:31 -0600 Subject: Sirius Black Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE9824@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84311 Are we in agreement that Sirius Black was in Slytherin house?? Tonya (this just dawned on me yesterday while listening to OOP, ok so I am a little slow on the up take........Sorry) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 15:49:16 2003 From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 07:49:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: TIPS - and traps - IN WORKING OUT CLUES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031107154916.32213.qmail@web12203.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84312 --- artcase wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" > wrote: > ...snip... > > > You cant apparate in Hogwarts (its been said so > many > > times by so many different characters that I am > > suspicious, but thats me) > Art here: > >Snip > Question regarding house elves. If there IS no > apparation/disapparation in Hogwarts, what do house > elves do? (think > Dobby snapping fingers and then he was gone) > Chris: I think this is delving into the human-centric view of life. From the multiple phrase usage in canon, wizards think that they are tops (the way house-elves, centaurs and even werewolves are treated). So, using that, it seem that saying '...you can't apparate in Hogwarts...' really means '...a _human_ cannot apparate in(or around) Hogwarts...' We have heard no non-human say thay phrase. Think of the implication, all non-humans, house-elves most noteably, would be able to apparate. But then think about other non-human, centaurs, goblins, mermaids, etc. (I am not going into vampires, giants or werewolves because of the lack of evidence that they are human or not human [though my belief is they fall outside of human and would therefore be able to apparate]). I think of the application for Voldie to take advantage of this slip in future books to cause havoc/distractions. But then agian, we do not know if there is other wards that prevent these other non-humans from apparating. Chris ===== "You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 15:49:36 2003 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:49:36 -0000 Subject: aargh! skip previous message In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84313 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > Blast it, I meant to send my last post directly to Del instead of > posting it on the list. My sincere apologies. *heating up iron, > preparing hands* Hey, drop that iron will you ! And, er, what message are you talking about exactly ? I can't find it, neither on the list nor in my mailbox... Del, confused From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 7 15:58:53 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:58:53 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84314 > "thesparksiii" wrote: > > > Now let me ask again: Does JK Rowling have anything against good- > > > looking guys? Or was it purely coincidental? > > > > "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > Now, who else is in the series at the moment who is handsome? Do > JK's references to folk such as Justin Fitch-Finchley or Ernie > MacMillan for example put them in that category? Place your bets, > ladies and gentlemen. > > Erin: > Bill! Bill springs immediately to my mind. And the Malfoys, > father and son. As for what she might have against good-looking > guys, her first husband I believe was fairly hot. Her current one > has been described as looking somewhat like Harry, lol. > Now me: This intrigues me, Erin! I'm wondering if others might weigh in w/ their opinions about the Malfoys, too. Because I'm thinking perhaps it's more of the Dreaded Movie Contamination which puts Draco, at least, into this category of handsome guys. Do we have descriptions of him in canon which paint him as attractive? I keep thinking of the "pale, narrow face" descriptions...which don't sound very attractive to me...but I think Tom Felton can be [and definitely Jason Isaacs as Lucius]. Input from others? Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 7 16:01:46 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 16:01:46 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE9824@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84315 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonya Minton" wrote: > Are we in agreement that Sirius Black was in Slytherin house?? > > Tonya No!!! Siriusly Snapey Susan ...who, in spite of her moniker, does not imagine those two in the same house. From tminton at deckerjones.com Fri Nov 7 16:09:20 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 10:09:20 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius Black Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE9825@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84316 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonya Minton" wrote: > Are we in agreement that Sirius Black was in Slytherin house?? > > Tonya ********************************************************** Siriusly Snapey Susan said: No!!! Siriusly Snapey Susan ...who, in spite of her moniker, does not imagine those two in the same house. **************************************************8 Now Tonya again: But after looking at the Noble House of Black and all it's oddities. Even Black said to Harry Don't you know what kind of wizards my family was?? Not a quote, I don't have the book with me. I cannot imagine Black and Snape in the same house either but look at the indicators. All these tips on how to see the clues that JKR leaves for us.... Tonya (I love Sirius and don't mean any disrespect by this suggestion. I cried when he died and will miss him horribly) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 16:26:29 2003 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 16:26:29 -0000 Subject: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84317 "artcase" wrote: > If Molly is the "anti-Aunt Petunia" then why does Aunt Petunia > represent a stay at home mom as well? Because she has to, or the whole blood-protection system wouldn't work. As we've seen in OoP, Harry has to be in the house to actually be protected. And that is most probably because the house is where Aunt Petunia is spending most of her time. So I guess when DD gave Harry to the Dursleys, he first made sure Petunia would actually be around. OK, granted, when he went to school Harry spent a lot of time away from the house, but he still spent most of it at the same place Petunia spent most of her time. Moreover, I think it would be terrible if Petunia was described as the bad working mother, while Molly would be described as the good stay-at-home mom ! Now what would THAT teach the young readers !? And the other way around might be seen as overly feminist, don't you think ? > BUT I still think it is an injustice to millions of children > readers, especially female ones, to only show fleshed out mom > characters that are stay at home moms. The real world does not work > like that and shouldn't IMO. I agree, but since we're seeing things through Harry's eyes, I'm afraid no other moms can be described. I mean, apart from his foster mother, and his best friend's mom because he spends some time there, who else could he see in their private surroundings ? Not his teachers (I never got to know my teachers that personally), not the members of the OoP (except if the Headquarters had been hosted in another family's home), so who ? There's just no way he can know any other mother in her mothering role. > IF women really want to be equal they should stop thinking in terms > of "stay at home mom" and in terms of Project Management. Men, take > a lesson too. If you define yourself as what you do, when what you > do is done, you are left with no persona. Psychologically this is > unhealthy and causes much more grief in this world than necessary. > There is no equality as long as people still believe a woman's > place is in the home. Er... Let's put it this way : I am a working mom and wife, and I am thoroughly miserable at work because my only dream *right now* is to be a stay-at-home mom. It doesn't have anything to do with my job, I could have my dream job that it wouldn't change my feelings. No, it's just that I want to spend my time at home for the next 20 years. So, as far as *I* am concerned, I believe that *my* place IS in *my* home for *me* to be happy. My husband, on the other hand, is right now unemployed, so forced to stay at home, and thoroughly miserable too, because he feels that he has to go out there and earn money to take care of his family, in order for *him* to be happy. So much for equality. And we're not doing it on purpose to annoy anyone. > A point in my initial post was: Why couldn't Sirus be viewed as a > single, non-conventional Dad? Because personally I'd be terrified to let an ex-convict, no matter how innocent he is and how close a friend of my husband's he used to be, take care of my son. I'd MUCH rather my son was taken in by a loving family. > You don't see the equality of sexes being undermined on two levels? Nope. I wouldn't want a *female* ex-convict to take care of my son either. And I'd much rather he was taken in by a loving *stable* single-*dad* family. It's not the fact that Sirius is a man and Molly a woman : it's the fact that Sirius has a dark past, unpredictable reactions and untried kid-raising skills, while Molly has a record of love, seven happy children, and very predictable reactions. Del From yswahl at stis.net Fri Nov 7 16:57:26 2003 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 16:57:26 -0000 Subject: The Little White Horse by Elizabeth Goudge -- spoiler warning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84318 pay homage to a character in The Little White Horse > > by Elizabeth Goudge, one of JKR's favorite books - I am in > > the middle of reading that now, more comments and > > observations when done. > > > > Would you mind pointing me and the list in the general direction of > the interview where she told us this? I'm particularly interested in > her 'literary tracks', since as an author, I know that anything we > read in childhood will effect us greatly down the line. I was > perfectly astounded to find how many parallels can be made between > C.S. Lewis's Narnia and Harry Potter... I have made over 50 and am > still making them. I have only found one cohesive parallel between > Harry Potter and Tolkien (that is, a non-surface parallel, something > that sinks deeper than just the basics), but there may be more there. > That parallel lies between the Mirror of Erisred and the enchanted > mirror of Galadriel. Both take the same fuction, if you think about > it- mirrors that show the viewer an unknown potential- and he/she is > unsure about what *exactly* that potential is, only that it can be > realized. Both mirrors are dangerous. Both mirrors are seductive. But > both could serve a useful purpose if you harness your emotions and > can control your desire. > > As for the C.S. Lewis parallels... they're too numerous to count > and the file is too big to be uploaded in text. As for other > children's books... I was very interested to discover The Enchanted > Castle by E. Nesbit, which had a few very interesting quotes about > magic. > > If literary parallels really intrigue you, I have started a group > for discussing them as they relate to Harry Potter. Anyone is > welcome, but keep in mind it's not a general Harry Potter list. No > messages will be censored, but we may bore those not interested in > going into the minutae of a writer's life and J.K. Rowling's > unconcious mind. It's here: > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join > > > > > g. to provide Harry with someone to explore the MoM with, > > particularly the arch - I dont see Hermione going back > > there anytime soon (before graduation) if for no other > > reason in that it affects Harry so much. > > > > Hermione is not interested in anything which makes her feel strange > or out of control of her own senses. I think that's probably why > she's a little disturbed about her feelings about Ron right now. She > seems to be handling her relationship with Krum well... but I suspect > that's because there isn't much behind it. But I have hopes that what > is going on with Ron is a whole lot deeper. As for what happened with > the arch, I suspect it disturbed her a lot because she could sense > its eerieness, and that kind of thing freaks her out. It is not > something she can solve or look up in a book. She is so very right- > brained. Luna is the exact opposite. I hope they never have to > collaborate on a school project. > > > -M.M. > > ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ > "if we ever want to achieve real peace > in this world, we must begin with the children." > -Gandhi From abush at maine.rr.com Fri Nov 7 17:17:44 2003 From: abush at maine.rr.com (kyliemckenzie1225) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 17:17:44 -0000 Subject: house elves and apparation at Hogwarts? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84319 in a previous post, samnanya remarked: Now me(kylie): This reminded me of a question I had while re-reading CoS. While Harry is in the hospital wing regrowing the bones in his arm, Dobby appears for a second time. When they are interrupted, we read " 'Dobby must go!' breathed the elf, terrified. There was a loud crack, and Harry's fist was suddenly clenched on thin air." We have read that this sound is supposedly connected to apparation, for instance, in Chapter 1 of OoP, after Harry is caught listening to the news, "Harry was sure that the cracking noise had been made by someone Apparating or Disapparating. It was exactly the sound Dobby the house-elf made when he vanished into thin air." so, my question is.....(okay, maybe I am missing something obvious, but...) are house-elves an exception to the rule that no one can apparate into or disapparate from within the grounds of Hogwarts? Is there a different kind of magic (i.e., not apparation) going on here? Can someone explain? thanks! kylie p.s. thanks to erika for correcting my misquote RE:SHIP: movie contamination From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 14:39:11 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 14:39:11 -0000 Subject: TIPS - and traps - IN WORKING OUT CLUES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84320 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: > thesparksiii > ============= > TIPS ON WORKING OUT CLUES IN THE HARRY POTTER SERIES > First, look closely at the statement following the > phrase "AS THOUGH." , > Second, watch out for what seems like only a couple of > uninteresting descriptions of situations that we barely > notice. > Last, DIVERSION. In the middle of an exciting scene, > JKR slips in important stuff that is quite immaterial > on what's exciting and tension-filled that is happening, > we tend to overlook it. > > samnanya > ============== > Thats a great start! The only problem is that JKR is > such a good plotter that there are literally dozens of > clues scattered everywhere that support all kinds of > different conclusions. The goal of any good author > is to keep the reader guessing. A reader who > has finished the series can usually find the buried > clues, even if the gleeful author doesnt actually > point them out. However, in the process all the red > herrings that were scattered along with the true clues > are quickly forgotten. M.M. I disagree. Going back through Goblet of Fire, one of my main goals was to re-discover scattered red herrings. There are surprisingly few, and many more signs that point to Barty Crouch, Jr., than I had realized. I simply didn't see them, and so I assumed, quite pompously, because I didn't see them, that they weren't there. > > What makes fansites like this so much fun {as long as we > dont take all this TOO seriously) is that there are clues > for almost EVERY result we want to see -- for shippers, > there is "canon" for every ship out there, > HH HG HL RH RL NG NL and on and on ..... > EVERY ONE of the above ships (except perhaps NL) > have several "clues" planted so that the alert > reader will say AHA! I KNEW IT! THAT IS WHAT HAD TO > HAPPEN! - if and when it does. > M.M. This is not necessarily true. By knowing a writer's style, you can pick up on a writer's clues. You can often predict a result before it happens. In Goblet of Fire, I was not able to predict the death before it happened, nor who was behind it. Going back and looking at the clues again, I realize that, had I sat down and really tried to puzzle the thing out instead of racing through the novel as I did, I might have had better luck. But I will say this; I picked up on the very first clue of Sirius's death in OotP; and the second I read the "house of a dying person" and then later, the foreshadowing about Harry's feelings of gloom before heading back to Hogwarts after Christmas, I knew Sirius was doomed. In fact, I wrote it down on a slip of paper along with the time and date, to make sure I couldn't change my mind. ;) As for there being 'canon' for every ship out there... frankly, there has not been canon for a Harry/Hermione relationship ever since the books started. There has been canon for a Harry/Hermione friendship. I know some of you want to roast me on this- go ahead. Here's my POV: Harry and Hermione have a quiet, friendly relationship. It is the kind that is mutually agreed upon, no tense sparks, no real arguements, but no romance either. Whereas Ron and Hermione... well, I can find about 20 places in GoF and OotP where Ron and Hermione both narrow their eyes, get red in the face, snort, etc, when Victor Krum is mentioned or Fleur Delacour pays a bit of attention to Ron. Hermione's jealousy is more subtle, but it's still there. The best examples are when Fleur kisses and smiles at Ron in book 4 (twice, once by the lake, and once before they leave Hogwarts for the summer.) Hermione is quite obviously jealous. Harry's bored by all of it. Then there's the blazing row they had after the Yule ball (which I'm certain has been gone into a thousand times on this list, so I'll leave it alone. You know what it was about.) In the CoS movie, Hermione and Harry hugged for a reason, but when Hermione went to hug Ron, and then awkwardly shook his hand, it was supposed to convey something. (That Harry and Hermione are friends, there's no sexual tension, so they can hug, but it's not that way with her and Ron.) While movies are not canon, Rowling does have a hand in them, through Kloves, and I suspect this was approved by her. I honestly have re-read all the books within the past 2 months, with an open mind toward relationships, but found nothing between Harry and Hermione. I started out reading Philosopher's Stone hoping that Harry and Hermione would be a couple- however, as it quickly was not evident, I changed my mind. Here's why: I've recently been picking up on the fact that Hermione has a lot of J.K. Rowling's personality inside her. Rowling said, herself, that Hermione is a lot like she was when she was younger. She also said that Harry is a lot like she is. I think, however, that she writes Harry's personality like she is NOW- Hermione is like her when she was younger. That that's the difference. But the problem is, there are no 'sparks' or romance between Harry and Hermione because the inspiration for the two characters is based on the same person... Rowling herself. She put different aspects of her personality into both, so they are different characters, but deep down at the bottom, they still remain her. And she can't fall in romantic love with herself. (The only person who can do that is Gilderoy Lockhart, lol!) I hope that made any sense.. if not, sorry. It's just that writers tend to base characters in books upon people they know, and sometimes upon themselves. As a result, those characters hook up with the people they naturally would in real life. If you can read between the lines, you can sometimes tell who a writer is basing their characters on. I have put certain parts of myself into different characters, at different times, and I notice that those characters never end up getting together, although they can be friends. Until I saw this in Harry and Hermione, I didn't really know why. > I have conjectured on the "Who REALLY killed Sirius" > theme and have mentioned several canon clues ..... > the important thing to remember is that "It aint > necessarily so!" - just because there are clues doesn't > mean it has to happen! > However, without the clues, if Lupin did kill Sirius, > the reader would go "Aw cmon! You've gotta be kidding > me!"; with the clues, if Lupin did kill Sirius, then > the reader cant say that it was beyond the realm of > possibility because we haven't always read what > we thought we read {remember the muggles eyewitness > accounts of Pettigrew's death?} > M.M. I understand what you're trying to say here, and I partially agree with you, but I partially disagree. There is such a thing as adding backstory in a way that it doesn't break the canon, but I have also seen writers attempt something that is beyond their reach. They do something which is not accepted by their readers; for example, let's take the Matrix. (No spoilers here... will keep this as general as possible.) The first Matrix movie was basically revolutionary. This isn't a pun on the last movie title. I'm just saying that the concept of the movie made people drop whatever they were doing and stare in amazement at the idea that we could be imprisoned within our minds. The Wachowski brothers, who made the movie, decided to make two others, claiming they had a previously written story which was meant to serve as the basis of three comic books. However, when Matrix: Reloaded came out, the reviews were overwhelmingly confused and negative. Many people rejected the story all together and said they'd just try to forget there ever WAS a sequel at all. Here's a quote from one of the reviews: "I'm warning you: don't see this film--because whatever third movie you envisioned in your head, no matter how lame, has got to be better than this." Now I know few of us could ever imagine that being said about one of Rowling's books. But if she was to write something that completely stretched the boundaries of the Harry Potter Universe so unbelievably that it basically *broke* those boundaries, the reviews for the book would probably read in a similar fashion. Because people prefer not to have sequels at all then to see their well-loved characters acting in a totally unbelievable fashion. For example, suppose book 6 came out with this plot: Lupin stands up in the kitchen of Grimmauld Place and announced to everyone he is REALLY an alien from the planet Zoopiter and he would be kidnapping Harry and flying him on his broomstick back to his home planet and cloning him to start a race of Super-Harrys to populate it, and then come back to earth to bury Harry in the mud for 1000 years, when he would next wake and kill us all. I think most of us would reject that plot. There are SOME things we can take for granted. Basically, like Hermione said in OotP... "If we can't trust Dumbledore, we can't trust anyone." If you read these books, you MUST take it for granted that Dumbledore is good, or you basically have not absorbed any of the book's lessons. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Understanding how we write teaches us how to read: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 14:54:12 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 14:54:12 -0000 Subject: I know Molly..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84321 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jdr0918" wrote: > > The Sergeant Majorette (also tired of the Molly bashing) says > > I got the chills just reading this, but it makes sense, and it works > with my theory that it's Lucius Malfoy that will turn out to be the > real threat. An old-school, with-your-shield-or-on-it matriarch like > Molly could soldier through any of those boggart deaths except > unrepentant!Percy. Maybe the "relationship at the heart of it all" > isn't teen love at all, but mother/child. > > --JDR (crying already! where's my anxiolytic?) JDR, Since Rowling's a mother herself, I think there's a good deal of possibility in this theory. She also likes to put new spins on old concepts, and is positively brilliant about showing us an old situation in a new light, which could be a cliche if another author wrote it. The "dying traitor redeemed by his actions" may very well be Percy. I hope, however, if this is the case, that there is time for his family to say their goodbyes, and make things right. I have a feeling however she writes the scene, it would be a powerful message about betrayal, resolution of conflict between family, and love. I also have to wonder how this would parallel to C.S. Lewis's Narnia. I really have to find a way to post my connections between the stories and the HP books up here. The similarites between Percy and Edmund run thick- and so do those between Dumbledore and Aslan. As you may remember, Aslan sacrificed himself and his life in exchange for Edmund's, since the White Witch demanded the blood of the traitor. Please be patient, I'll break up the C.S. Lewis file and post it in several ones, probably over the weekend. It needs a bit of revising, too. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Compare and Contrast Tolkien, Lewis, and Rowling! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 15:24:58 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:24:58 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84322 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote: > Erin: > Bill! Bill springs immediately to my mind. And the Malfoys, > father and son. As for what she might have against good-looking > guys, her first husband I believe was fairly hot. Her current one > has been described as looking somewhat like Harry, lol. > Bill is definately "cool." And it looks like the Weasley twins will be following in his footsteps with those cool dragonskin jackets. I feel a bit sorry for Ron, though. He's probably really envious. I do hope he chooses a career that allows him to make enough money so that he won't be constantly envying his brothers. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Galileo's head was on the block The crime was looking up the truth And as the bombshells of my daily fears explode I try to trace them to my youth... -Indigo Girls, "Galileo" From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 15:05:50 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:05:50 -0000 Subject: Where does Harry keep his stuff? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84323 Just a question... unable to turn up any results after extensive archive searches. Where do you guys think Harry keeps his accumulated stuff? After 5 years of birthday presents, Christmas presents, and stuff from Dobby, trips to Hogsmeade, and random other things, like the Golden Egg, I have to wonder, that trunk's getting a little full now! Do you suppose it's magically sized? Since Harry seems to notice whenever something's been unnaturally expanded, I don't think it has.. but it seems like he'd have too much stuff by now to be carting back and forth. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Cowards die many times before their deaths; The valiant never taste of death but once. Of all the wonders that I yet have heard, It seems to me most strange that men should fear; Seeing that death, a necessary end, Will come when it will come. -- Julius Caesar, Act II, Scene ii, by William Shakespeare From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 16:22:55 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 16:22:55 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE9825@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84324 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonya Minton" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonya Minton" > wrote: > > Are we in agreement that Sirius Black was in Slytherin house?? > > > > Tonya > Now Tonya again: > > But after looking at the Noble House of Black and all it's oddities. > Even Black said to Harry Don't you know what kind of wizards my family > was?? Not a quote, I don't have the book with me. I cannot imagine > Black and Snape in the same house either but look at the indicators. > All these tips on how to see the clues that JKR leaves for us.... > > Tonya (I love Sirius and don't mean any disrespect by this suggestion. > I cried when he died and will miss him horribly) > Tonya, I think the indicators point to Sirius being in Gryffindor. After all, his mother screams that he's a traitor. Why? Certainly not for going to Azkaban under suspicion for killing Muggles. That would have made her happy. I think it was probably his being put in Gryffindor that did it. We also heard him say that he ran away to James's house when he was 17. That implies that they were extremely close, and I doubt they formed a close enough relationship for him to basically be like another son to the Potter grandparents unless he was in Gryffindor. There is also the issue of how and where they would all meet to figure out how to become Animagi if they weren't studying in the Gryffindor common room, together, nights. I think the friendship between Padfoot, Prongs, Moony, and Wormtail, was probably an inter- house thing. I can hardly imagine them all sneaking out under invisiblity cloaks every night to study Animagi theory. -M.M. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* Current discussions: Is J.K. Rowling an apologist for boarding schools? The deeper meaning behind Padma and Parvati http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 18:04:22 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 18:04:22 -0000 Subject: What to do about Sirius's mother Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84325 Checked out archive messages for similar posts- waded through many... nothing like this found. This is an idea, dunno how plausible, since I think it's Rowling's intent to keep Sirius's mum alive and up on that wall as a reminder of how, oh... obsessive people can be in the W.W. about blood purity, even when it comes down to their own sons and daughters. Still, it would be nice for her to come up with a better way of shutting the portrait up than just curtains. So, Ms. Rowling, may I duly suggest, should Dumbledore be unable to detach the Permanent Sticking Charm: Enclosing the potrait in a wooden cupboard with a door, latching the door from the outside, and putting an impeturbable charm upon it. If I remember correctly, this would prevent sound from coming in, or out. And they'd like to keep her wailing in. Depends on whether Rowling's wishes override those of the characters, I guess. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* "The ability to ask the right question is more than half the battle of finding the answer." -Thomas Watson From erinellii at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 18:29:46 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 18:29:46 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84326 > Now me: > This intrigues me, Erin! I'm wondering if others might weigh in w/ > their opinions about the Malfoys, too. Because I'm thinking perhaps > it's more of the Dreaded Movie Contamination which puts Draco, at > least, into this category of handsome guys. Do we have descriptions > of him in canon which paint him as attractive? I keep thinking of > the "pale, narrow face" descriptions...which don't sound very > attractive to me...but I think Tom Felton can be [and definitely > Jason Isaacs as Lucius]. > > Input from others? > Siriusly Snapey Susan Erin: Movie contamination? Maybe it is, though I believe I saw it written in a fanfic before I ever considered the actors hot. Actually I don't even think they are, much. I'm not too into blonds. But i can see that practically everyone else does consider them good-looking. You're right, JKR doesn't really write as if she considers them in the "handsome" category- but she sure doesn't rule it out, either. I mean, really, a blond with a pale, pointed face is actually the epitome of movie-star good looks, isn't he? I'm thinking Leonardo DiCaprio and that guy who plays the elf in the LoTR trilogy. If she'd wanted to rule this interpretation out, she'd have added something like "washed-out" or "weak" features to the mix. Instead they get "cold". Cold to me denotes strength, making them sexy. And I believe JKR did get some imput into the actors when they were making the movie. Not a lot, perhaps, but I think that if she'd started screaming "This isn't right! Malfoy should have a harelip!" we would have heard about it. You know, now that I think about it, she had to write them the way she did because she is using Harry's POV. And the Malfoy's type of handsomeness is not one that other males are likely to acknowledge. Too effiminete (sp? sorry) for them. Like, how many straight guys do you know who are okay with admitting that Leonardo or Justin Timberlake is good-looking? No, you get "He's a sissy-boy". Whereas with Mel Gibson they can say, "OK, I don't swing that way but I can see it," because he has a more masculine beauty. In the same way, Harry can acknowledge that Cedric or Bill is Handsome, but not the Malfoys. But anyone of the female persuasion immediately sees that they are Hot with a capital "H". After all, Pansy is hanging all over Draco, isn't she? Erin From princessmelabela at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 18:43:05 2003 From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 10:43:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) In-Reply-To: <01E7094E.076A7420.0B4B226A@aol.com> Message-ID: <20031107184305.884.qmail@web20709.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84327 Already at the end of the book when Harry was speaking with Luna, you could begin to see the change in his character. He was beginning to look at the behavior of Black and his father in a more adult manner. Just my opinion, JMM Woah there just a second. Where did you get that from the end of the book? Perhaps, the fire after the pensieve scene is the only time where I can say that he clearly shows that he is upset by Sirius' and James' actions. However, I am inclined to think that the real reason this was so hurtful to Harry was not that he hated what he saw so much as it was he finnally realized that the vision he had of his father (and of Sirius himself) was false. They are not perfect! They do make mistakes, plenty of them. ~Melanie We shall never forget Sirius Black....long live his memory! Come visit my LJ http://www.livejournal.com/users/princessmela2 Click to subscribe to Sirius_Black --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk Fri Nov 7 18:43:49 2003 From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 18:43:49 -0000 Subject: What to do about Sirius's mother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84328 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "moorequests" wrote: > > > This is an idea, dunno how plausible, since I think it's Rowling's > intent to keep Sirius's mum alive and up on that wall as a reminder > of how, oh... obsessive people can be in the W.W. about blood purity, > even when it comes down to their own sons and daughters. > > Still, it would be nice for her to come up with a better way of > shutting the portrait up than just curtains. So, Ms. Rowling, may I > duly suggest, should Dumbledore be unable to detach the Permanent > Sticking Charm: > > Enclosing the potrait in a wooden cupboard with a door, latching > the door from the outside, and putting an impeturbable charm upon it. > If I remember correctly, this would prevent sound from coming in, or > out. And they'd like to keep her wailing in. Depends on whether > Rowling's wishes override those of the characters, I guess. > > -M.M. It seems to me that the Wizarding World just isn't hands on enough. Getting rid of Old Mrs Black? Very simple. Take a. one large can of paint, take b. one paint roller. Apply ingredient a. to the picture while using tool b. Presto - bye bye Mrs Black. Hello very chic modern new canvas. Pretend it's by Rothko. I'd personally enjoy the splutters as the paint hit her. But seriously. I do wonder if JKR might not just feel that the Grimmauld Place scene and atmosphere has been just a tad done to death by the next book? And there are more that enough living pureblood obsessives running around the plot without labouring the point with a painting. June From tminton at deckerjones.com Fri Nov 7 18:56:27 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:56:27 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius Black Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE4625F5@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84329 MM said: Tonya, I think the indicators point to Sirius being in Gryffindor. After all, his mother screams that he's a traitor. Why? Certainly not for going to Azkaban under suspicion for killing Muggles. That would have made her happy. I think it was probably his being put in Gryffindor that did it. We also heard him say that he ran away to James's house when he was 17. That implies that they were extremely close, and I doubt they formed a close enough relationship for him to basically be like another son to the Potter grandparents unless he was in Gryffindor. There is also the issue of how and where they would all meet to figure out how to become Animagi if they weren't studying in the Gryffindor common room, together, nights. I think the friendship between Padfoot, Prongs, Moony, and Wormtail, was probably an inter- house thing. I can hardly imagine them all sneaking out under invisiblity cloaks every night to study Animagi theory. -M.M. Now Tonya: I sure hope you are right!! I really don't want him to be from Slytherin. Tonya [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From yswahl at stis.net Fri Nov 7 19:18:02 2003 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 19:18:02 -0000 Subject: The Little White Horse by Elizabeth Goudge -- spoiler warning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84330 moorequests --------------- Would you mind pointing me and the list in the general direction of the interview where she told us this? I'm particularly interested in her 'literary tracks', since as an author, I know that anything we read in childhood will affect us greatly down the line. Samnanya --------------- Though I dont currently have the time to find the exact interview, JKR's comments are right there on the lower left front cover of the Penguin paperback edition of TLWH (ISBN 0 14 2230027 6) -- "I absolutely adored the Little White Horse" - J. K. Rowling, creator of the Harry Potter books. Since JKR or her lawyers don't yet own Penguin Books I assume that the quote is legitimate. I have not quite finished reading TLWH yet but there are a lot of VERY interesting parallells to HP -- I will post a far more detaliled post once I have digested the book. For now, the TLWH reader will find .... an orphaned child with special heritage detailed descriptions of characters appearance detailed descriptions of objects tons of references to moons and silver very clever animals who arent what they seem unusually smart cat special archways and veil a manor with unusual objects a castle "only the moon can banish the blackness of night" prophecies about the Moon Princess special mirror the evils and consequences of not controlling one's temper dichotomy - "we are really all of us two people" a "living" chess set "I don't believe ___ is a ___ at all! (S)he's a _____!" a peace-loving whomping willow a critter with a powerful tail (Fawkeslike at end of CoS) "shooting out such terrifying flames of fire from h** great green eyes" an archaic dated writing style, but still endearing story and a VERY interesting ending ....... That said, I think that TLWH influenced the magical nature of the HP world, but JKR updated and changed so much that most readers (except for people like me who have too much time on their hands) won't find very many overt connections between the plots and characters of the books. More like what one would find if JKR had put her memories of TLWH in a pensieve that was vigorously shaken, but not stirred. I left in this reference to new group for the interested ---- moorequests ------------- If literary parallels really intrigue you, I have started a group for discussing them as they relate to Harry Potter. Anyone is welcome, but keep in mind it's not a general Harry Potter list. No messages will be censored, but we may bore those not interested in going into the minutae of a writer's life and J.K. Rowling's unconcious mind. It's here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join Samnanya From nibleswik at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 18:19:49 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 18:19:49 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84331 > > "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > Now, who else is in the series at the moment who is handsome? Do > JK's references to folk such as Justin Fitch-Finchley or Ernie > MacMillan for example put them in that category? Place your bets, > ladies and gentlemen. > > Erin: > Bill! Bill springs immediately to my mind. And the Malfoys, > father and son. As for what she might have against good-looking > guys, her first husband I believe was fairly hot. Her current one > has been described as looking somewhat like Harry, lol. > > Erin I don't remember either Justin or Ernie being handsome, but I could be wrong. Bill was the first one I thought of, as well. As to the Malfoys, I don't recall any basis for their good looks in canon. Sure you aren't being swayed by Jason Isaacs and Tom Felton's evil influence? The other character I thought of was Firenze: "'He's not a horse, he's a centaur!' said Lavender, sounding shocked. 'A gorgeous centaur . . . " sighed Parvati." -OotP, p. 599 This does seem a legitimate concern, though. I'd never thought about that connection between Lockhart, Cedric, and Sirius (and Tom Riddle, for that matter). Cheekyweebisom From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 18:39:21 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 18:39:21 -0000 Subject: Rowling's politics (Was I know Molly.....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84332 > The worst type of book, in my opinion, is a pedantic, overly > preachy one. Thank God Harry Potter is not. > > -M.M. I think her left-wing political views are pretty transparent via Hermione, whom I liked better when she wasn't so self-righteously defending the rights of house elves. (I'm not attacking her views, just wishing she had left them out of the book.) Her dislike of government interference in education is also apparent throughout OoP. Fortunately she made Umbridge into a character you love to hate. But I do feel at times that she (Rowling) is as preachy as Percy at times--and utterly in favor of rule breaking. I hope the last two books are less overtly political and concentrate more on the characters and the essential elements of the story. No more spew, please. (Sorry, Hermione. I know it's S.P.E.W., but I'm with Ron on this.) Carol, who's afraid she's in for it now From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 19:28:35 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 19:28:35 -0000 Subject: Luna doesn't wear silk, and replies to other Luna threads In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84333 This will have to be a bit quick, since I'm getting ready to go away with a bunch of Girl Scouts for 24 hours... dan wrote: > Annemehr's post, a very nice one, I must say, while alluding to the > alchemy interpretations of Luna's role, doesn't stop there, which is > good. But I wonder how effective her processing of her ostracism > really is? Or, rather, I should say, if there's any profit in it, for > herself? This would be my concern, with a RW person like Lovegood. > Then again, what would be the cost of piercing the shell, if it could > be done? The thing is, even thinkers like Annemehr can be taken in > wholly by Luna's appearance. As much as I love her, there is > something definitely wrong. If Luna is our passage to Potter, what > does that say about us? Thanks for the kind words! Now, on to Luna... It seems to me we are reading her a bit differently, so maybe this discussion can bring a few new things to light. My impression of her was that she did indeed have some ability to cope. That impression was reinforced by what she told Harry: that the lost things always come back in the end*, and that we will see our dead again someday. I imagined that at least part of the reason for her stability was the love of her family: thus she does have somewhere to "belong" and her ostracism is not complete. She also has advantages Harry missed in that she had her mother for nine years and then had two years to come to terms with her death before going to Hogwarts. To be sure, ostracism must take its toll. Perhaps her coping mechanism could not have held out forever. However, I think she's just found new reenforcements -- membership in the DA and a friend in Harry. I'll even note that, when pairing up in DA lessons, Luna was not the one left without a partner; that was Neville. Something is definitely wrong with Luna? I wouldn't be surprised -- something is definitely wrong with all of us, and with Rowling's other characters also. Perhaps my post overemphasised her strengths and their complement to Harry's weaknesses, and you do seem to have more of an idea of her weaknesses than I do. Still, as things are wrong with me too, I see no obstacle to relating to Harry through her; though come to think of it, I am much more like Harry as far as weaknesses go and so find her strengths that much more attractive. I'm afraid that's the best I can do for now, but I didn't want to lose the thread. I'm looking forward to reading your ideas. Annemehr *It occurs to me in typing this that it could turn up as a general theme somehow, not literally though, of course... From sydpad at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 20:18:27 2003 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:18:27 -0000 Subject: The Little White Horse and Slytherin, SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84334 Samnanya wrote: > I have not quite finished reading TLWH yet but there are > a lot of VERY interesting parallells to HP -- I will post > a far more detaliled post once I have digested the book. I'm so glad this has been introduced as a topic, though I should put spoiler-space for those who have not yet read "The Little White Horse"-- s p o i l e r s - - - - - - - Okay! What I found the most fascinating is what it may tell us about what Rowling is intending to do with Slytherin House. In TLWH, we start out with the safe assumptions that the cheerful, sunny squire (I can't remember his name), and his ancestors were the 'good guys', and the creepy, black wearing crooks were always the bad guys. There was a dispute between them in the distant past that ended with the 'bad guy' leaving, hoovering however around the edge of the world of the book and occasionally causing trouble. Much like in HP, we slowly start to discover things that complicate the picture. For one thing, many of the heroine's ancestors came from the side of the 'bad guys'. For another, The 'good guys' weren't so pure-- much of their power and money came from seizing the lands of a third group, the monks. The initial split between the 'good' and 'bad' was a complicated affair where both sides behaved badly. There's a significant sub-plot about a couple who had a raging fight over something very trivial and have lived in resentment ever since. I was surprised by the sophistication of this plot given the very young age group for which the book seems to be aimed. There is also an admonition to the heroine to heal the rift and make good on past wrongs. She asks the squire to return the land to the monks (now defunct, I think they give them to the church or something), unravels the mystery that caused the initial rift (a thing over missing jewels), and the book ends with the 'bad guys' (still rather scary and thuggish) being invited to tea and to rejoin the community. I definitely think that Rowling is very, very consciously building on the themes of TLWH (if it was unconscious, I don't think she'd plug it so often). These are also themes that you find a lot in Jane Austen, another huge influence-- that self-deception is the most insidious kind, and that things are always more complicated than they appear. TLWH gave me a lot of hope for a resolution to the conflict with Slytherin, which has always been the most uncomfortable part of the books for me. One of my favorite quotations is from Dostoyevsky: "It would be a wonderful thing if you could draw a line between the good people and the bad people, and just get rid of the bad ones; but the line between good and evil runs through every human heart, and who can cut out a piece of his own heart?" That Rowling would create a world featuring the repulsive idea that you could draw the line and cut out the bad people at age 11 is something I refuse to believe. LTWH, like HP, doesn't suggest that EVERYTHING is just a big misunderstanding or that there is no such thing as bad actions. But it does try to move kids away from a good-guy/bad-guy world view into a nobody-here-but-us-flawed-humans thing. Predictions? I think we're going to have to go back to the Founders at some point and take another look at the Slytherin rift. I think the series will have to end with something positive being done on the House front. Sydney From entropymail at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 20:22:14 2003 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:22:14 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE9824@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84335 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonya Minton" wrote: > Are we in agreement that Sirius Black was in Slytherin house?? > > Tonya The Lexicon has Sirius listed as a Gryffindor: "Sirius was something of a rebel from childhood, having been sorted into Gryffindor rather than his family's more traditional Slytherin." I'm not sure where the info came from, but the Lexicon has never done me wrong yet! :: Entropy :: From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 7 20:30:17 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:30:17 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE9825@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84336 Tonya wrote: > > Are we in agreement that Sirius Black was in Slytherin house?? > ********************************************************** > Siriusly Snapey Susan said: > No!!! > > Siriusly Snapey Susan > ...who, in spite of her moniker, does not imagine those two in the > same house. > **************************************************8 > Now Tonya again: > > But after looking at the Noble House of Black and all it's oddities. > Even Black said to Harry Don't you know what kind of wizards my family > was?? Susan again: But I don't believe the sorting hat necessarily puts family members all in the same house. I believe it evaluates each *individual* in determining where to place him or her. Yes, all the Weasleys ended up in Gryffindor, and probably most of the Blacks in Slytherin. But I still think the hat is "smart" enough to know when a member of a family comes along who's *different*.... Siriusly Snapey Susan From yswahl at stis.net Fri Nov 7 20:30:55 2003 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:30:55 -0000 Subject: SHIP SHIP HOORAY!!! was TIPS - and traps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84337 moorequests====== As for there being 'canon' for every ship out there... frankly, there has not been canon for a Harry/Hermione relationship ever since the books started. There has been canon for a Harry/Hermione friendship. I know some of you want to roast me on this- go ahead. Samnanya ================= IMO Hermione prefers Harry to Ron, and I presented my arguments for this in 79495. This is not denying that there are many clues for other ships as well, and I feel that no reader should be suprised WHATEVER the outcome. Rebuttals to HH ship relating to my response in 79497 and 79521. The RH vs HH argument goes more to the "opposites attract" (RH) vs. "will Harry ever get his head out of his butt and notice that Hermione really does love him?" (HH) schools of thought. And if you think that there isnt at least SOME attraction between Hermione and Harry, at least on Hermione's part, well... From erinellii at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 20:35:52 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:35:52 -0000 Subject: Rowling's politics (Was I know Molly.....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84338 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > I think her left-wing political views are pretty transparent via > Hermione, whom I liked better when she wasn't so self-righteously > defending the rights of house elves. (I'm not attacking her views, > just wishing she had left them out of the book.) Well, of course you aren't "attacking her views". I mean, who in this day and age would admit to being in favor of slavery? :-) But I am surprised that you charecterize being against slavery as being left-wing. I would think it is just sort of- well- the decent thing to do. I'm a republican, btw. I have to say I was pretty surprised the first time I read GoF, and no one wanted to join SPEW. I would have jumped right on board. Of course, the fact that many of the elves don't WANT to be free changes things a bit, and maybe excuses the WW kids, since they've grown up in that culture. But you can't tell me the muggle-born ones KNOW this. Hermione didn't even know there *were* house-elves at Hogwarts until 4th year, so I doubt the other muggle-borns know much about them at all. Then they are told by Hermione that they are an enslaved race of beings and no one is even *interested*? I very highly doubt that it would play out that way in RL. But it may be that I am influenced overmuch by living in the American south, where you can't really escape the history we have here. You know, I also doubt very much that American wizards keep House- elves. "justcarol67": Her dislike of > government interference in education is also apparent throughout OoP. Again, maybe this is relating to something in the British political landscape that I, as an American, am just not getting, but it would never have occured to me to liken the Umbridge plot to anything taking place in RL. As far as I know, my government isn't trying to invade the schools and surpress evidence of the return of an evil wanna-be overlord. "justcarol67": > I hope the last two books are less overtly political and concentrate > more on the characters and the essential elements of the story. No > more spew, please. (Sorry, Hermione. I know it's S.P.E.W., but I'm > with Ron on this.) One more thing about the elves: I really don't think JKR has put them in there to make a political point. I think they do serve plot functions, and will go on to serve more. In each of the three books they've shown up in, they've been *major* players plotwise. But having put them in, JKR was forced to think how her characters would react to their presence. And this was just how Hermione would react. So JKR pretty much *had* to put it in, if she wanted to stay true to the personalities of her characters. Erin From erinellii at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 20:40:40 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:40:40 -0000 Subject: The Little White Horse and Slytherin, SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84339 >> > Sydney: > s > > > p > > o > > i > > l > > e > > r > > s > > - > - > - > - > - > - > - > LTWH, like HP, doesn't suggest that EVERYTHING is just a big > misunderstanding or that there is no such thing as bad actions. But > it does try to move kids away from a good-guy/bad-guy world view > into a nobody-here-but-us-flawed-humans thing. > > Predictions? I think we're going to have to go back to the Founders > at some point and take another look at the Slytherin rift. I think > the series will have to end with something positive being done on > the House front. Erin: This is what I've felt for a long time also. And do you get the feeling that Luna, as a tribute to Maria, will be instrumental on that front? From lbiles at flash.net Fri Nov 7 20:53:27 2003 From: lbiles at flash.net (leb2323) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:53:27 -0000 Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84340 Paula: > > Ever since my second read of OotP and subsequent rereading of a > >few chapters, can't stop thinking about Luna Lovegood. Exactly > >who/what is she? When we first meet Luna on the train going to > >Hogwarts, she's described as having "waist-length, dirty blond hair > >(not sure if dirty refers to the condition of her hair or the > >color, I think it's probably the condition due to her spacy > >character), very pale eyebrows and protuberant eyes..." Jen: > Now it may be a coincidence, but the only other person with misty, > silvery eyes is Ollivander: > > Another similarity between Ollivander and Luna is their remarkable > ability to discern information about other people's character > without attaching emotional judgements. >Initially I thought Ollivander and Luna were related along her mother's side and > Luna will be the heir apparent to the Ollivander wand dynasty! But > perhaps they could be another type of magical being instead, some > form of 'intuitive beings'. I'm just not sure why JKR would > introduce a new group so late. I find the link between Luna and Ollivander interesting. A long time ago there was some discussion about Ollivander's physical description. The link I know is post # 70944. Someone named Claire likened Ollivander to a silver coated mirror and mentioned that the eyes are the mirrors of the soul. My response back then was that I was always reminded of the descriptions of unicorns whenever I read the physical description of Ollivander. The same holds true for Luna as well. I don't exactly know where I am going with this but does anybody see any unicornish, unicorny, whatever traits besides me? I don't have the Fantastic Beasts book so maybe there is something in there that would give some insight. Thanks. leb From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 20:54:32 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:54:32 -0000 Subject: What to do about Sirius's mother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84341 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "moorequests" > wrote: > Enclosing the potrait in a wooden cupboard with a door, latching the door from the outside, and putting an impeturbable charm upon it. > June > It seems to me that the Wizarding World just isn't hands on enough. Getting rid of Old Mrs Black? Very simple. Take a. one large can of paint, take b. one paint roller. Apply ingredient a. to the picture while using tool b. Presto - bye bye Mrs Black. Hello very chic modern new canvas. Pretend it's by Rothko. > Laura: I like June's idea but I'd take it a step farther. Use a paint scraper-and make Kreacher do it. "La vengeance est un plat qui se mange froid." (Revenge is a dish served cold.) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 19:46:58 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 19:46:58 -0000 Subject: How are we going to Kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84342 > Not only does he [Peter] owe his life to Harry, but he literally has a hand > that is not human. As we did not hear anything about him in OOTP, we > do not know how useful a silver hand could be yet. I wonder if it > could block curses like the statue in the MoM battle. We do know that it can crumple a twig to powder, probably suggesting that it can do the same to a human limb (or neck). Re Harry's cruciatus curse (I snipped the reference--sorry)--it wasn't successful, according to Bellatrix, because it didn't have enough hatred behind it. If it had been, would Harry have been exempt from Azkaban? Carol From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Fri Nov 7 20:50:21 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:50:21 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius Black Message-ID: <197.221e56d7.2cdd5f8d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84343 Hello tminton at deckerjones.com, In reference to your comment: ? Are we in agreement that Sirius Black was in Slytherin ? house?? Tonya (this just dawned on me yesterday ? while listening to OOP, ok so I am a little slow on the ? up take........Sorry) Noooo!Just because your family is made up of Dark Wizards doesn't mean you are one or that you would be placed in Slytherin. As DD said, it's all about choices. Black made up his mind at a very young age not to be what his family was. I think it is fair to say that there is NO way Sirius was in Slytherin. There are many clues, the foremost being Snape's memory. Wormtail, Moony, Padfoot, and Prongs probably would not have been all sitting together, all laughing at Snape, and all discussing how James nicked the snitch were they not all in the same house. With Harry, we see that most 'close friendships' grow out of households. INHO, Sirius was in Gryffindor. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Nov 7 22:38:17 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 22:38:17 -0000 Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84344 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leb2323" wrote: > > I find the link between Luna and Ollivander interesting. A long time > ago there was some discussion about Ollivander's physical > description. The link I know is post # 70944. Someone named Claire > likened Ollivander to a silver coated mirror and mentioned that > the eyes are the mirrors of the soul. My response back then was that > I was always reminded of the descriptions of unicorns whenever > I read the physical description of Ollivander. The same holds true > for Luna as well. I don't exactly know where I am going with this > but does anybody see any unicornish, unicorny, whatever traits besides > me? I don't have the Fantastic Beasts book so maybe there is > something in there that would give some insight. Thanks. Jen: Yes! I was reminded of unicorns too, and forgot to weave that theme into my post. Luna reminds me of a unicorn for the "purity" factor--pure of spirit rather than other meanings. FBWTFT doesn't have any additional information from what we learned already: That unicorn foals are gold and turn silver with maturity (nice symbolism there perhaps), the horn, blood and hair all have highly magical properties, and that unicorns are more likely to allow a witch to approach than a wizard. So, don't know if that spurs any thoughts for you re: Luna--my creative thoughts are ebbing at the moment! From rredordead at aol.com Fri Nov 7 22:40:36 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 22:40:36 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black and Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84345 Tonya wrote: > > Are we in agreement that Sirius Black was in Slytherin house?? :: Entropy :: wrote: > The Lexicon has Sirius listed as a Gryffindor: "Sirius was something > of a rebel from childhood, having been sorted into Gryffindor rather > than his family's more traditional Slytherin." > I'm not sure where the info came from, but the Lexicon has never done me wrong yet! Now me: The Lexicon is a very good reference however lately they have been taking liberties with the 'canon'. The comment quoted above about Sirius' house is not canon as far as I can tell. I have searched the books and if anyone has a page reference please let me know. Usually the Lexicon will quote page references, which is why I'm inclined to believe contamination. Along with Sirius, Lupin and Peter the Lexicon has made assumptions about which houses a lot of characters belonged to. E.g. Lucius and Narcissa Malfoy and the Lestranges. Of course it's not a huge leap of faith to think Lucius and the Lestranges were in Slytherin but it is not yet canon as nowhere in the books does it state categorically that they were. Also as we now nothing about Narcissa it is wrong to place her in any particular house yet. Personally I place Sirius in Slytherin because it is more interesting to me to imagine his character having to struggle against the influence of the rest of the Slytherin members as well as against his family. Mandy From dean7712000 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 13:25:58 2003 From: dean7712000 at yahoo.com (Dean) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 13:25:58 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84346 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "thesparksiii" > wrote: > > DOES JK ROWLING HAVE ANYTHING AGAINST GOOD-LOOKING GUYS? > > > > > Now let me ask again: Does JK Rowling have anything against good- > > looking guys? Or was it purely coincidental? Let's just see and we > > better watch out for the next guy who will be described > > as "handsome" for something terrible might come his way. So far the following characters have been described as "handsome" -Sirus -Cedric -Lockhart -Tom Riddle -Strangely enough Madame Maxime -Duddly but by his mother so i dont think it counts There is a pattern with the first four and Maxime is female so I don't think she is doomed. There is also this little bit in book five, the quote is about Bellatrix just after Harry tried to curse her "Her counter-spell hit the head of the handsome wizard, which was blown off and landed twenty feet away, gouging long scratches into the wooden floor." I think it's talking about a statue but it's still interesting. From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 15:35:30 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:35:30 -0000 Subject: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84347 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "artcase" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" wrote: > > I have read the recent postings about Molly's role and the debates > of > > her as a homemaker. Molly's character fills the role of the anti- > > Aunt Petunia. This privides balance to the universe of evil vs. > good, > > but it also furthers the contrast between the two worlds that Harry > > lives in. Molly is the caring mother-figure that Harry never had > in > > his life before finding out he was a wizard. Molly worries and > looks > > after Harry's well-being from the moment she hears from her sons > that > > he is on the Hogwarts Express. She includes him with family members > > on gift-giving occasions. She makes sure he is well-fed > ("encourages > > him to eat fourth helpings")and fusses over him in a motherly > fashion > > ("fussed about the state of his socks"). Plump, warm, nurturing > > Molly is the opposite of bony, cold, prison-warden Aunt Petunia. > Art here: > > If Molly is the "anti-Aunt Petunia" then why does Aunt Petunia > represent a stay at home mom as well? And please don't tell me that > Aunt Petunia isn't guilty of the same vicarious-give-her-all-for- her- > children (in this case, Duddykins) Poof that Molly does. Art.... there is one major difference between them, and it is a big one. Molly is happy and fufilled in her roll as housemaker, mother, and queen of the castle, and Aunt Petunia is not. This is why Molly is an anti-Petunia... it's the attitude. Molly chose her role. With such a large family, it is often much more financially wise to have a parent stay home to care for the children than to have both work and hire someone to take care of the children. Since childcare providers get upwards of $10-12 dollars an hour now, it can really take a full day's wages to pay for childcare. I agree that many women, like Petunia, step into roles simply because they feel they must, that it is expected, and it makes them miserable. However, Molly is NOT miserable. She still may assume some stereotypes and take on female duties willingly, but so long as she is happy in those roles, I don't see a problem with it. It is when we cannot step back and see how stereotypes and sexism affect us that we become chained to those stereotypes. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ "Adding up the total of a love that's true... multiply life by the power of two" -Indigo Girls, Power of Two From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Fri Nov 7 15:54:12 2003 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 15:54:12 -0000 Subject: Molly as written in the books In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84348 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermionegallo" wrote: > > hg is compelled to respond. > Let's try to bring this topic back round to the books, because we're > all going to get too hotheaded otherwise. > hg replies: > She has chosen another project. It's the Order of the Phoenix. (snip) I don't believe that her role in the > Order is limited to cleaning Grimmauld Place. At the very least, > even if she isn't actively on-duty guarding the prophecy, for > example, or bringing Harry from Privet Drive to Grimmauld, she is > performing other functions such as keeping track of who is where, > when -- and likely relaying information. She sets out meals for > Order members as they come and go (they do need to eat) and is > included in the meetings, which would indicate to me that her role > within the Order isn't simply a token one. In that case, she would > be off cleaning up after suppers instead of participating in the > meetings. (snip) I'm currently re-reading OOP to my son and a few nights ago read the chapter where Sirius speaks to H,R & H via the fire in the Common Room. He delivers a message to Ron from Molly in which she warns Ron to not participate in the D.A. Sirius tells them that Molly could not deliver the message herself because she was "on duty" for the order that night. So she does do more than just cook and clean, although the cooking/cleaning aspect of what she does is emphasized a lot. Demetra (who wishes she knew a witty and clever saying to sign off with) From pjcousins at btinternet.com Fri Nov 7 21:34:59 2003 From: pjcousins at btinternet.com (confusinglyso) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 21:34:59 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] How are we going to Kill Voldemort? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84349 > From: nymphadoraotonks at a... > Date: Thu Nov 6, 2003 4:41 am > Subject: Re: [HPforGrownups] How are we going to Kill Voldemort? now Phil (confusinglyso) with a large pinch of salt. Dumbledore has said to Lord Thingy that there are worse things than death. Lord Voldemort's payback will involve MUGGLES, the ultimate disgrace from his point of view. When finally captured, LV will be strapped into the chair where the WW1 trials were held (GoF, Dumbledore's pensieve). Having obviously been found guilty, the sentence is then carried out. Here we at last find muggles and wizards united. Hermione's mother and father, both DENTISTS, say aaarhh, approach Voldemort menacingly (is that JKR-ishly) with oversize drills in their hands. Moreover the drill bits are rejects from Vernon Dursley's factory. Voldemort screams in terror at such fiendishness and is reduced to utter madness. He then is taken away to share a padded cell with Gilderoy Lockhart for the rest of his, now natural, life. Finally, WW2 over and death eaters rounded up, Harry and Ginny get married and leave wedding party in Arthur Weasley's car. JKR has said last word is S C A R ;) Phil(istine) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 18:53:15 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 18:53:15 -0000 Subject: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84350 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" wrote: > I have read the recent postings about Molly's role and the debates of > her as a homemaker. Molly's character fills the role of the anti- > Aunt Petunia. This privides balance to the universe of evil vs. good, > but it also furthers the contrast between the two worlds that Harry > lives in. Molly is the caring mother-figure that Harry never had in > his life before finding out he was a wizard. Molly worries and looks > after Harry's well-being from the moment she hears from her sons that > he is on the Hogwarts Express. She includes him with family members > on gift-giving occasions. She makes sure he is well-fed ("encourages > him to eat fourth helpings")and fusses over him in a motherly fashion > ("fussed about the state of his socks"). Plump, warm, nurturing > Molly is the opposite of bony, cold, prison-warden Aunt Petunia. Excellent point (but please don't assume that bony women can't be motherly!). It's not just Petunia's treatment of Harry that's involved here. Look how she treats her own son. Imagine her sending him the muggle equivalent of a howler, if there were such a thing. She doesn't discipline Dudley in any way (except for the grapefruit diet ordered by the school). Till then she probably sent him sweets--as Draco's mother also does. Carol From MadameSSnape at aol.com Fri Nov 7 23:11:02 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 18:11:02 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] house elves and apparation at Hogwarts? Message-ID: <113.2b1d0c6d.2cdd8086@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84351 In a message dated 11/7/2003 3:35:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, abush at maine.rr.com writes: so, my question is.....(okay, maybe I am missing something obvious, but...) are house-elves an exception to the rule that no one can apparate into or disapparate from within the grounds of Hogwarts? Is there a different kind of magic (i.e., not apparation) going on here? Can someone explain? thanks! Sherrie here: Hermione's insistence that "you can't Apparate or Disapparate at Hogwarts" is based on information she got from HOGWARTS, A HISTORY - which is extremely humanocentric. I don't think it even mentions house elves at Hogwarts - if it did, I don't think Hermione would have been so surprised to find out about them in GoF. Humans can't Apparate/Disapparate at Hogwarts - but the magic of house elves is different, it would seem. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rredordead at aol.com Fri Nov 7 23:12:17 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:12:17 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84352 "thesparksiii" wrote: Now let me ask again: Does JK Rowling have anything against good-looking guys? ...Snip Erin wrote: Snip...And the Malfoys, father and son. Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: This intrigues me, Erin! I'm wondering if others might weigh in w/ their opinions about the Malfoys, too. Because I'm thinking perhaps it's more of the Dreaded Movie Contamination which puts Draco, at least, into this category of handsome guys. Now me: Absolutely agree. Definitely movie contamination. The Malfoy's were described as pale faced and thin, not to mention cruel. The actors cast to play them are seriously good looking and ::very:: sexy. Suddenly everyone is crushing on Lucius and Draco. (Well perhaps just me...No...Didn't think so.) ;-) JKR, in her last interview at the Royal Albert Hall, said we are all getting far to fond of Draco, and I'm convinced it's because of the movies, as in the books he is still this weak little twerp. Now in the end of OotP Draco is finally showing some gumption and rising to take hold of some power and use it, and nothing is more attractive to a woman than power. So, to follow the books alone Draco should only now becoming attractive to us, but I confess he's been an attraction since just after GoF, when the first movie came out. Now what about Snape? In the books he is definitly ugly and very unattractive. JKR takes every opportunity to describe him as such, but in the movie...Alan Rickman, although not a handsome man in the conventional sense, is very attractive and damned sexy. Does he qualify? Handsome is in the eye of the beholder right? So just who qualifies as handsome? And how do men and women differ in who qualifies? All I can do is speak for myself and for me it's always the bad guys. Hey I even find Lord Voldemort attractive ..trust me it's the power thing .it is really .OK .I'm leaving now. Mandy From bigredpanda at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 22:36:49 2003 From: bigredpanda at yahoo.com (bigredpanda) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 22:36:49 -0000 Subject: Speaking up for Petunia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84353 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > Jen: The still waters of Petunia's resentment run very deep, > methinks! I'm sure getting dumped with a toddler she was *persuaded* > to keep was part of it. > > Especially a toddler with Lily's eyes, who reminds Petunia > constantly of the conflicted relationship she shared with her > sister. And a toddler who also looks "remarkably" like his father, a > man Petunia despised. (Shades of Snape here?) > > And the final blow is the fear she must feel for her own family, a > fear we finally glimpse in OOTP. She's accepting a child from a > *freaky* (i.e. scary) world, a child who was the victim of attempted > murder by a very evil soul who murders people without compunction. <> A thought occurred to me as I read this, do you suppose the reason Petunia is so nosey, i.e., always peering out the windows at the neighbors, is because she's watching out for suspicious characters who might be from the wizarding world? I imagine knowing how her sister died would keep her paranoia at a very high level. Just a thought, Diane From moorequests at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 22:20:15 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 22:20:15 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84354 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nibleswik" wrote: > > > "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > > Now, who else is in the series at the moment who is handsome? Do > > JK's references to folk such as Justin Fitch-Finchley or Ernie > > MacMillan for example put them in that category? Place your bets, > > ladies and gentlemen. > > > > Erin: > > Bill! Bill springs immediately to my mind. And the Malfoys, > > father and son. As for what she might have against good-looking > > guys, her first husband I believe was fairly hot. Her current one > > has been described as looking somewhat like Harry, lol. > > > > Erin > > I don't remember either Justin or Ernie being handsome, but I could > be wrong. Bill was the first one I thought of, as well. As to the > Malfoys, I don't recall any basis for their good looks in canon. > Sure you aren't being swayed by Jason Isaacs and Tom Felton's evil > influence? The other character I thought of was Firenze: > > "'He's not a horse, he's a centaur!' said Lavender, sounding > shocked. > 'A gorgeous centaur . . . " sighed Parvati." > -OotP, p. 599 > > This does seem a legitimate concern, though. I'd never thought about > that connection between Lockhart, Cedric, and Sirius (and Tom > Riddle, for that matter). > > Cheekyweebisom I won't be snipping, since I think you've all made great points in this thread I want to talk to. This does not seem a real problem, however, in my mind, especially considering that all the people you've mentioned, Cheeky, are over the age of 16, and by that time, girls have started fawning over boys. Girls in school go for older boys, not the boys of their own year or own age. Draco seems to be the exception, with Pansy. (And that does occur within the book.) Perhaps, however, Pansy is simply taking leftovers, as there don't seem to be anyone who is described as 'less than hideous' in Slytherin, other than Draco. He's passable. Ernie has been described as having mildly good looks, but a pompous personality. Remember when, after Luna declares that she supports Harry, when nobody's believing him in the mid-beginning of OotP, Ernie says, very loudly, and in a tone Harry doesn't like, "I want you to know, Potter, it's not only weirdos who support you." I think I got that quote almost exactly correct. Probably because I can hear him saying it in my head! I knew a lot of folks like that in my growing-up, high school years. I think most of us did. They were the ones who turned out politicans. ;) As for Justin and as for Sean and Dean and Seamus- why, they're too young to be getting many looks from females. Girls like to look up when they look for a date or a crush- usually about 3, 4 years up. I think they do it to find corresponding emotional maturity, and for that, they must expand the age range. So in their 5th year, girls from 1st and 2nd would be making eyes at them. And first/second-years are too timid to actually talk about or do anything about their crushes. But I suspect once we're in books 6 and 7, we'll see some romance actually happening, even between the lesser known characters. Heck, we already saw that Ginny was proficient in dating. And we have no idea how handsome Michael Corner is. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ I love people, I really do, and yet, in viewing the future, I am forced to be guided by a certain cynicism because so many people, however, lovable, seem immune to reason. -- The Stars in their Courses by Isaac Asimov From nibleswik at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 23:09:47 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:09:47 -0000 Subject: Evil Slytherins: a generalization? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84355 "There's not a witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in Slytherin." -Hagrid in PS/SS Can this be true? I don't think it can. For one thing, Hagrid is biased in matters of the houses; for another, he is given to hyperbole and often dangerous generalizations. The obvious example to the contrary is Wormtail. Did JKR ever say what house(s) the Marauders were in? I assume they were all in Gryffindor, but I suppose this might not be the case. James we know to have been in Gryffindor, but what of the others? Pettigrew seems entirely unsuited for it. He can be called many things, but brave is not one of them. What house best fits him? And really, why is there this stereotype of evil Slytherins? The criteria for being one are cunning and ambition, neither of which are inherently evil traits. Why shouldn't Ravenclaw yield just as many baddies? A thirst for knowledge could lead a wizard to study the Dark Arts, and he could be drawn in. The same is true of Hufflepuff and Gryffindor. Hufflepuff is the house of the loyal, right? Well, misplaced loyalty could lead someone to follow an evil wizard. Loyalty towards a person in need could drive someone to do anything, regardless of the moral implications involved, to better that person's life. As for Gryffindor, bravery does not equal honor. Barty Crouch the younger was quite brave to hide right under the nose of the only wizard who ever frightened Voldemort himself, wasn't he? I wonder when Slytherin became associated with evil. And how much are the non-Slytherins exacerbating the problem by treating all Slytherins as though they're Voldemorts-in-training? Especially the sanctimonious Gryffindors! If there's a disproportionate number of evil Slytherins, is this due to the expectations of the rest of the wizarding world? I also wonder what parallels JKR may be trying to draw with this. If Wormtail was a Gryffindor, is this a warning against thinking evil people are easily identifiable monsters -- the Slytherins, as it were? That evil can be, and is, among us? What do you think? Cheekyweebisom From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 23:07:25 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:07:25 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84356 thesparksiii at y...> wrote: > Does JK Rowling have anything against good-looking guys? Or > was it purely coincidental? Laura: > If that's the algorithm, then Snape will live forever. :-) True. Well, they say the good die young. So, Snape is safe on two counts. Yolanda (who knows that Snape is a good person (way deep down), but not a good person to take potions from if your a Gryffindor.) From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 23:19:32 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:19:32 -0000 Subject: parenting Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84357 Hi Del- Okay, I'm trying again after carefully making sure I had the right address this time... A disclaimer: I am hardly trying to set myself up as a parenting expert! I only speak for myself. My posts are based on what I've experienced and seen others experience, but I've never made a study, and I am aware that there is a multiplicity of opinions and approaches on this subject out there. Lots of different parenting techniques work, and none of them is perfect-because we're not perfect. My credentials, such as they are (*grin*) are that my husband and I have 2 kids, a son 18 who is in his freshman year at a college entirely too far away from us (sigh) and a 15 year old daughter who is a sophomore in high school and the person who got me hooked on HP. I'm a full-time at-home mom and volunteer. I'm extremely lucky to have been able to do this, I know. You wrote: But do you have any idea how many parents out there STILL believe that kids are some kind of creations that must be molded to fit their parents' expectations ? My in-laws are like that, which may be why Mike (my husband) doesn't live in his hometown. Actually, I think they had kids only as a way to have grandchildren-they started badgering their kids about that when they were little. Arrgh! You wrote: And as far as saying that Molly's attachment is not healthy, I think you're going too far. Molly wants what's best for her kids and she thinks she knows better than they do, so what ? Seems perfectly normal to me. Wrong, but normal. She hasn't realised Bill is an adult, and maybe she never will, like many *many* moms. Perfectly normal, nothing unhealthy in that. It may be normal but I don't think it's healthy. How sad not to let your kids grow up and be who they are. I'm discovering that one of the great rewards of parenting is watching your kids grow into the person they are to be. Seeing them take on responsibility, learn how to care for other people, watching their minds grow increasingly sophisticated is the most remarkable thing. It would be sad if Molly deprived herself of that joy. Because the kids will grow up and become independent whether she likes it or not, so she may as well enjoy the ride. You wrote: I've met quite a few women who think something entirely different, namely that true happiness comes only in losing yourself completely in the service of yout family. If that makes them happy, who can say it's not healthy ? I have to admit that the phrase "losing yourself in the service of your family" makes me very uncomfortable. Maybe you mean something different than the way it sounds to me. But I don't think any relationship is a healthy one when one party loses their identity in it. It's the interaction that makes it a relationship; otherwise, it's just like talking to yourself. You wrote: But some don't WANT to ! For some it's simply painful to be away from their family, even for the shortest of times ! The thing is, though, even if you don't want to be away from them, they're going to want to be away from you. School, friends, summer camp-all those things take them away from us and into their own lives. Maybe it's good to get some practice before it's forced on us. And it's a good thing to spend some time alone with your partner-kids take up so much time and emotional energy that sometimes you neglect the other adult you live with. You wrote: You know, most people don't react *that* quickly to changes in their lives. I guess Molly just didn't realize beforehand how drastically her life would change once Ginny was off to school. And even after Ginny left, it might have taken months, maybe even years, for Molly to understand why she wasn't feeling too good. In real life, it often takes years for people to pinpoint the origin of their unhappiness. I hear you on that! Even knowing that our son would leave and being able to prepare for it, wwe're still feeling the repercussions. There's only so much you can do to prepare for the unknown, I guess. Still, it wasn't like it was a big surprise that Molly would be alone in the house once Ginny left. You wrote: Honestly ! Look around you and tell me how many people actually deal with fear by gaining power over it ?! Actually, more than you might think. I've done a lot of volunteer work with our local AIDS service organizations, and I've known many women who are cancer survivors. And the way that people handle the worst news imaginable is consistently amazing and awe-inspiring. Most of the people I've known have picked themselves up off the ground and fought back, by learning about their disease, by taking care of themselves, by loving the life they have left. It's extraordinary to see. That doesn't mean you don't feel fear or that the cause of the fear goes away. It just means you choose not to give in to it. And I don't think the people I know are different from most.> You wrote: So maybe you can help me with a problem I'll have to face in a few years : how do you tell a child about sex offenders that prey on kids ? Sigh. Yeah, it is heartbreaking to think that your innocent kids will have to confront the ugliness that exists in the world. Still, I think there are ways to do it that decease the emphasis on fear and put it on honing your own resources. It always makes me sad when I see parents in the grocery store tell their kids to stay close "or else someone might steal you and take you away". I mean, gee, our friends and lovers were strangers once, right? Not all people we don't know are bad; in fact, most aren't. It was always more important to teach our kids coping mechanisms than to tell them in detail what there was to be afraid of. Then, if, God forbid, something happened to them, they had a shot at coming out of it alive and in one piece. So, for instance, we would tell them that if they got separated from us in the store, they should find a clerk, and we'd make sure to show the kids what the employee id looked like. And we had a code word that anyone trying to pick them up from school would have to use. We also taught them to call for us in a crowd by our names rather than mommy or daddy, since anyone can be mommy or daddy. Once the kids start school, they learn stuff very quickly, sad to say. A lot of parents don't keep a strict eye on their kids' levels of media exposure in this sex-saturated culture of ours, so kids think they know all kinds of stuff and are always happy to tell their friends about it. I tried to monitor what the kids were hearing so that I could correct misinformation and answer questions. But some stuff you'll just never hear about. I said: But you don't act the same way with a 15 year old as you do with a 15 month old, and you don't act the same way with a 25 year old as you do with a 15 year old. You wrote: Then why do you think so many parents do just that ? A lot of parents have a favorite age and they'd like to keep their kids that age forever. Maybe that's part of it. Maybe it's fear of losing our power over our kids, or fear that they'll leave us. But none of these things will prevent the inevitable. If you respect your kid's growth, you probably have the best chance at staying close to him or her, because they know that you love them for the person they are at that stage of development. In other words, you love them for themselves, not because they're an extension of you. "artcase" wrote: In another post, you responded to artcase: Moreover, I think it would be terrible if Petunia was described as the bad working mother, while Molly would be described as the good stay-at-home mom ! Now what would THAT teach the young readers !? And the other way around might be seen as overly feminist, don't you think ? What do you mean by overly feminist? Feminism doesn't devalue motherhood, at least not the feminism I know. It advocates that both women and men be allowed to choose what they do with their lives free of gender stereotypes. Feminists nowadays recognize the importance of parenthood a lot more than the general culture does, imo. You wrote: Er... Let's put it this way : I am a working mom and wife, and I am thoroughly miserable at work because my only dream *right now* is to be a stay-at-home mom. My husband, on the other hand, is right now unemployed, so forced to stay at home, and thoroughly miserable too, because he feels that he has to go out there and earn money to take care of his family, in order for *him* to be happy. So much for equality. And we're not doing it on purpose to annoy anyone. I'm American (don't know if you are) and I think that in this country we talk a lot about how much we value children and families, but we don't walk the walk. My conversations with women suggest to me that many more would like to be at home with their kids than can afford to be. But there's no cultural support for that. Full time mothers are still thought of as slackers, kids are nothing more than walking advertisements for clothes, shoes and toys, pay for day care providers is so awful that the turnover is ridiculous, and on and on. Family leave-hah. It will take a groundswell of outrage from women (and men too, I hope, but most of the energy will come from us, I suspect) to change this-and it's growing out there. You don't need to apologize to anyone for the family structure you and your husband want. There are lots of ways to be a family and as long as everyone's fed and cared for, the details are up to the family in question, it seems to me. You and artcase both have reason to be angry-you're not getting the societal support you need to be a parent, and what more important job is there than that? Traditional, feminist, post-modern, gay, straight, single, blended- who cares what the label is as long as everyone is cared for and loved? I hope things get easier for you and your family very soon. Best- Laura From rredordead at aol.com Fri Nov 7 23:22:56 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:22:56 -0000 Subject: The Little White Horse and Slytherin, SPOILERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84358 > > Sydney wrote: Snip.... I think we're going to have to go back to the > Founders > > at some point and take another look at the Slytherin rift. I think > > the series will have to end with something positive being done on > > the House front. > > Erin wrote: > This is what I've felt for a long time also. And do you get the > feeling that Luna, as a tribute to Maria, will be instrumental on > that front? Now me: Yep. I think it's all down to the Shorting Hat song and the essential unification of the Houses to stop Hogwarts from destroying its self. Slytherin is the only hold out, but something will make Draco turn and aid Harry if only to save his own life. In turn that power of unification will be used to vanquish the Dark Lord. Not sure how but I believe this final battle will be fought on the grounds of the school with the representatives of all four houses uniting to battle Lord Voldemort. Something like that. Mandy From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 23:29:46 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:29:46 -0000 Subject: not again... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84359 My abject apologies...it happened again. Just ignore my last post (or any of my posts-I'll understand). I'm working with the elves to see what's going on here. From vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com Fri Nov 7 23:33:58 2003 From: vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com (vecseytj) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:33:58 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84360 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > "thesparksiii" wrote: large snip: > Now let me ask again: Does JK Rowling have anything against > good-looking guys? ...Snip Hey I even find Lord Voldemort attractive ..trust me it's the power > thing .it is really .OK .I'm leaving now. > > Mandy Hi, Mandy~ Well, DD describes Vodemort as very handsome when he went to school at Hogwarts... but, he went thru so many changes his looks changed to ulgy. I think it is just that as he got older his ulgy soul started showing on the outside. But, I do think this post has some merit because I can't think of a good looking person in the entire book who hasn't been killed off, or been a bit self envolved (ie: Cho, Siris at 15). I wonder if JK Rowling maybe is making a suble point about looks. And how other people treat them... look at Harry and Cho, he kept going back and, I don't think they ever had any fun together, he just found her looks exciting. Oh well, just a thought. Tj From thomasmwall at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 23:37:31 2003 From: thomasmwall at yahoo.com (Tom Wall) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:37:31 -0000 Subject: Maturity as a theme in OoP and Sirius' future plot relevance (WAS: Sirius quite In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84361 Replies to Jen Reese and Kneasy in this post. Jen: I mean, what else can you do with Sirius? He's literally and figuratively backed into a corner--can't leave the house, isn't safe anywhere in the world apparently, can't do much for the Order, has massive emotional baggage that the WW is unable or unwilling to deal with--can JKR really leave him smoldering in Grimmauld Place for two more books? I think she did the noble thing and gave him a way out, a hero's way out at that--dying to save his best friend's son. Tom: You know, I hadn't really looked at it that way before... come to think of it, the situation that she delineated concerning Sirius really also should have given us a clue as to who was going to die by the end of the book. Of course, I never saw Sirius' situation coming, either. Actually, based on the way that Dumbledore used Sirius to spread the word to "the old crowd" at the end of GoF, I thought that we were going to see a very useful Sirius. Perhaps not a Spy!Sirius, per se, but most certainly a Sirius who would be doing... well, *something.* Come to think of it, now, the only thing I really saw coming in OoP was the fact that Dumbledore was going to be discredited, although to be honest, I fully believed that it was going to come to light that Dumbledore had been aiding Sirius. Great - another "How very wrong I was" realization. ;-) Jen: And while I don't think Sirius *had* to die in order for Harry to make a big leap in his moral development, I do agree this is exactly what happened (seeing as the character had to die anyway without any reasonable plot development left ). Harry is already learning about his reckless side, his penchant for 'playing hero' in OOTP prior to Sirius' death, but his death does speed up the process of realization quite a bit! Tom: Oooh! Ooooh! Since I've found so many nails already, I figured I might as well point this one out, too. ;-) Coming to understand and recognize one's own patterns of behavior is also a sign of maturity! Kneasy: Note that I didn't (surprise, surprise) *insist* that he would be revealed as Evil!Sirius, in fact that is only one of three, (? four) revelations I can think of that might have plot implications. Tom: Yeah - I didn't think that you were implying an Evil!Sirius. Did I imply that you implied an Evil!Sirius? It's tough to recall, sometimes. ;-) What I meant to present was the fact that Sirius' character always seemed to me to be a vehicle for JKR to demonstrate flip-flopping in regards to his ulterior motivations as a character. PoA, of course, is a concrete case of this, in both the case of his hidden innocence and the concretized metaphor of his transformative abilities. In that sense, Sirius always sort of has been a character who exemplifies dichotomous drives. And, for the record, I do agree with you when you suggest that Sirius will likely remain in subsequent plotlines in the future, one way or the other. I just don't see too many big Bang!s in his future. Kneasy, drawing a distinction betwen post-facto rationalization and analysis: Post facto rationalisation (by my definition) doesn't involve hard work at all. It's more of an off-the-cuff knee-jerk reaction (if that's not too much of a mixed metaphor). It can be correct, of course, which is bloody annoying. Tom: Okay - now I understand how you are drawing this distinction. So, you'll have to forgive my - admittedly ignorant - confession on this point, since I confused what you call pfr with what I call analysis. Distinction accepted. ;-) Kneasy: [Maturity] is *a* theme. There are multiple themes. But if you only consider one theme, you are like someone whose tool kit consists only of a hammer - everything looks like a nail. Tom: I agree, but to a limited extent. Naturally. ;-) I do think it's fair to point out that authors in general - and JKR, in particular - because they're dealing in fictional universes, do very handily tend to use metaphors and plot-points in their tales to kill two, three, four or more thematic birds with one stone, so to speak. So, whereas I might just be a wee bit guilty of, um, *overnailing* my points to the various plot twists in OoP, I would counter by arguing that - true authorial motives aside - it's quite possible, even likely, that many of those examples were deliberately used by JKR to cover and add depth to the maturity theme in OoP. I readily concede that they were likely meant to convey other impressions as well, but I do think that it's the case that these books are nearly always operating on a variety of levels at all times. Kneasy, in response to my mondo long list of "maturity" examples: I see this as a prime 'hammer' interpretation. You don't seem to have considered any other alternatives. Tom: Well, to be fair, I *was* trying to paint the picture for Maturity, y'know? ;-) Kneasy's list of objections to my list of examples, beginning with: Knowledge is not maturity, how you use it may be. Tom: Mmmm... I'm not so sure about this. I agree, but only tangentially. That is to say that one could very legitimately argue that coming of age tales quite frequently employ the dirty-secret, skeleton-in-the- closet revelation concerning respected family members as a method of forcing a character to mature. And in OoP, of course, that insight into the past is doubled in that Harry learns not only about his Dad, but also about Snape. Kneasy: Disobedience is not maturity (Ron did worse with the flying car). Tom: Ahh, now I think that *you're* trying to pull a fast one. ;-) I didn't say that disobedience was a sign of maturity. I said that the desire to make not just decisions, but *important* decisions for oneself was distinctly a sign of maturity. So, I'd have to draw a distinction here between, on the one hand, Ron and the twins taking the Ford Anglia in CoS, and Harry making surreptitious trips to Hogsmeade in PoA; and on the other hand, the quite conscious DA decision-making that concerns *belief* in OoP. The actions, while all "disobedient" to a degree, are the results of different motivations. For instance, I wouldn't argue that commandeering the Anglia is a decision that reflects developing maturity. But the DA is different, in the sense that it illustrates the kids' growing awareness of the state of the world around them, and their desire to both prepare to interact with in on a more perilous level. Learning to defend oneself is definitely related to the process of growing up. And not just in the physical sense. This ability to protect oneself is also paralleled by Ron's unfamiliarity with pre-Quidditch match taunts. Kneasy: Sirius (re Regulus) is filling in background Tom: Again, I'd be more inclined to view this situation as one that is distinctly operating on a variety of levels. I mean, yes, this story does fill us in on some necessary backstory concerning not only Sirius, but also James. It also reiterates a fairly common theme that threads throughout the series as a whole: families are broken apart by Voldemort. It additionally sheds light on possible motivations for people joining the Death Eater ranks, as well as on the severity of Voldemort's reaction to dissenters. But I brought it up in the context of maturity because it both repeated and deepened the oft- repeated theme of *choices,* in the sense that both Sirius and his brother made choices, and those choices had direct impacts on their futures. So, I see this as definitely connected to the theme of maturity, even if it is accomplishing several goals at once. Kneasy: DD seems to understand teenagers very well, but he deliberately lies to further his own plans. Tom: Oh Kneasy, you and Dumbledore's subversive behavior. ;-) I do agree that Dumbledore is not - shall we say - entirely forthcoming with his information all the time. And I do readily admit that he's careful with his language, *and* that he's still hiding certain puzzle pieces from Harry. And it *is* canonical fact that Dumbledore has an agenda. But he did say also that old age sometimes forgets what it's like to be young. And, at least on a very surface - albeit rather uninteresting and fairly obvious - level, that is a commentary on maturity and what happens when you have a little too much of it. Kneasy: Career advice is a right of passage, but nobody seems mature enough to make realistic choices. Tom: Well, no, they're not mature. That's the point of the Career Advice in the first place - it facilitates this maturation process. I mean, from my perspective, I never had a clear-cut direction planned for myself. But I was forced to make decisions, and now I have to take responsibility for them. And the assumption of responsibility for one's actions and choices is quite distinctly related to the development of maturity. And, of course, assuming responsibility for one's actions is really something that most adults confront almost daily, right? Kneasy: Disillusionment can happen at any age. (And always after careers advice.) With Harry it happened when he realised what the Dursleys were really like. He'd be about seven, I imagine. Tom: Okay. *This* one I'll give you. ;-) Disillusionment *can* happen at any age. One could quite easily construct a case for Snape's turncoating as a result of adult disillusionment. Yes, there's a "but" on the way. But. That doesn't mean that it's not also standard-fare for coming of age tales as well. ;-) Another two-bird one-stone situation. -Tom From artcase at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 23:40:21 2003 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:40:21 -0000 Subject: TIPS - and traps - IN WORKING OUT CLUES In-Reply-To: <20031107154916.32213.qmail@web12203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84362 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, An'nai Jiriki wrote: > > --- artcase wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" > > wrote: > > ...snip... > > > > > You cant apparate in Hogwarts (its been said so > > many > > > times by so many different characters that I am > > > suspicious, but thats me) > > Art here: > > > >Snip > > Question regarding house elves. If there IS no > > apparation/disapparation in Hogwarts, what do house > > elves do? (think > > Dobby snapping fingers and then he was gone) > > > > Chris: > I think this is delving into the human-centric view of > life. From the multiple phrase usage in canon, wizards > think that they are tops (the way house-elves, > centaurs and even werewolves are treated). > > So, using that, it seem that saying '...you can't > apparate in Hogwarts...' really means '...a _human_ > cannot apparate in(or around) Hogwarts...' We have > heard no non-human say thay phrase. > > Think of the implication, all non-humans, house-elves > most noteably, would be able to apparate. But then > think about other non-human, centaurs, goblins, > mermaids, etc. (I am not going into vampires, giants > or werewolves because of the lack of evidence that > they are human or not human [though my belief is they > fall outside of human and would therefore be able to > apparate]). > > I think of the application for Voldie to take > advantage of this slip in future books to cause > havoc/distractions. But then agian, we do not know if > there is other wards that prevent these other > non-humans from apparating. > > Chris Art: Perhaps that is WHY house elves are so important to Dumbledore! From rredordead at aol.com Fri Nov 7 23:43:59 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:43:59 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84363 Snip > Hey I even find Lord Voldemort attractive ..trust me it's the power thing .it is really .OK .I'm leaving now. > > Mandy > > Hi, Mandy~ Well, DD describes Vodemort as very handsome when he went to school at Hogwarts... Snip > But, I do think this post has some merit because I can't think of a > good looking person in the entire book who hasn't been killed off, or been a bit self envolved (ie: Cho, Siris at 15). > I wonder if JK Rowling maybe is making a suble point about looks. > And how other people treat them... Snip Tj Mandy again: I agree. I was just thinking of the Veela in GoF and Mr. Weasley's comment on don't go for looks alone boys. Something like that. Certainly JKR is saying a lot on the superficial exterior vs. internal substance. Perhaps all the handsome ones are doomed. Mandy. From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Sat Nov 8 00:25:43 2003 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 00:25:43 -0000 Subject: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84364 --- artcase wrote: > BUT I still think it is an injustice to > millions of children readers, especially > female ones, to only show fleshed out mom > characters that are stay at home moms. The > real world does not work like that and > shouldn't IMO. If you're saying not all the moms in the RW are SAH, of course that's true. It's also true in the WW in the series, as I pointed out, there being exactly -- count her -- one SAH mom witch, Molly, and exactly two working moms that we know of, Dr. Granger and Alice Longbottom. Instead, though, I think your real complaint is that the working moms aren't "fleshed out." There, you're sort of stuck with the fact that the story is told from a kid's point of view. (And a kid at boarding school, no less.) It's not terribly surprising that of his friends' parents the one he would see most of is the SAH parent. It's much easier for Molly to host Harry for a few weeks a summer than it would be for Hermione's mom (or dad), if they both work full time. I can appreciate your desire to see different kinds of characters, but I think it's unfair to brand JKR's portrayal as unrealistically traditional. If anything, her WW is more progressive than the RW in terms of gender equality. (I can't think of any RW schools founded by women in the 10th century, for instance.) -- Matt From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Sat Nov 8 01:03:00 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 20:03:00 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Speaking up for Petunia References: Message-ID: <003e01c3a594$0e32f7f0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 84365 Diane said: A thought occurred to me as I read this, do you suppose the reason Petunia is so nosey, i.e., always peering out the windows at the neighbors, is because she's watching out for suspicious characters who might be from the wizarding world? I imagine knowing how her sister died would keep her paranoia at a very high level. now Joj: What a great observation! I've always had a nagging feeling about Petunia's nosiness, but never put that together. It seems so obvious! I sure hope I'm not getting my hopes up, thinking we're going to see a more three-dimentional Petunia in the last two books. Joj "For every action, there is an equal and opposite government program". [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jesmck at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 01:31:22 2003 From: jesmck at yahoo.com (jesmck) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 01:31:22 -0000 Subject: Evil Slytherins: a generalization? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84366 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nibleswik" wrote: > "There's not a witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in > Slytherin." -Hagrid in PS/SS > > Can this be true? I don't think it can. For one thing, Hagrid is > biased in matters of the houses; for another, he is given to > hyperbole and often dangerous generalizations. > Jessica: I just had to respond to this post because I've been wondering the same thing. I've always taken his statement to mean that every witch or wizard who went bad came from Slytherin, not every Slytherin is bad. I refuse to believe that every single person in that house is evil (they may not be nice, but that's another story), and I don't believe that JKR would make such a broad generalization in a book that continuously reinforces that you should not just take people at face value. There's a quote to back me up too: the description of Slytherin in CoS on page 77 US Ed. the house that has turned out more dark witches and wizards than any other It just says more, not all. I still have to look through the other books for more. Does anyone else know of any quotes to support this? From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 04:56:21 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 04:56:21 -0000 Subject: Where does Harry keep his stuff? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84367 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "moorequests" wrote: > > ...edited... > > Where do you guys think Harry keeps his accumulated stuff? After 5 > years of birthday presents, Christmas presents, and stuff from > Dobby, trips to Hogsmeade, and random other things, like the Golden > Egg, I have to wonder, that trunk's getting a little full now! ..edited... > > -M.M. bboy_mn: Where does Harry keep his "STUFF"? Is this boxers or briefs quesiton? Sorry, I couldn't resist. I don't think that Harry has really accumulated that may things. Mrs. Weasley sends him a sweater and some assorted foods. Hermione and Ron frequenlty give him candy. When he does get more substantial presents, they seem to be relatively small. Besides the Golden Egg and the set of books that Remus and Sirius gave him, I can' think of anything that's very big. One large item he has that he halls around since the end of first year is his broom. I don't recall too many comments about him trudging around King's Cross Station with his broom over his shoulder, So, I have always assumeed it was stored in his trunk. Long broom, short trunk; I think the conclusion is obvuious - enchanted trunk. Thank you and good night. bboy_mn From erinellii at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 05:04:55 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 05:04:55 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84368 > Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: Because I'm thinking perhaps > it's more of the Dreaded Movie Contamination which puts Draco, at > least, into this category of handsome guys. > > Now Mandy: > Absolutely agree. Definitely movie contamination. The Malfoy's were described as pale faced and thin, not to mention cruel. Erin Ok, you've made me do this, I'm gonna have to quote JKR, and then myself. (I can't believe I'm here defending the Malfoys when this type of guy is SO not my type!) So here we go, CoS, Ch. four: "The man who followed could only be Draco's father. He had the same pale, pointed face and identical cold, gray eyes." Erin from message 84326: I mean, really, a blond with a pale, pointed face is actually the epitome of movie-star good looks, isn't he? I submit, for your viewing pleasure, this picture of Orlando Bloom, a recognized hottie: http://www.orlandobloom.co.nz/images/legolas18.jpg Take a good long look. Don't try to tell me his face isn't pale and pointy. It *is*. So pale and pointy *can* be handsome. And as for the cruel expression and the cold gray eyes? Well, I'll let Mandy say it first: Mandy: Now in the end of OotP Draco is finally showing some gumption and rising to take hold of some power and use it, and nothing is more attractive to a woman than power. Erin: Unless it is a man who misuses that power and then has to show remorse...like Snape........ Ok, but to snap back to the business at hand, here's me again from message 84326: "If she'd wanted to rule this(handsome)interpretation out, she'd have added something like "washed-out" or "weak" features to the mix. Instead they get "cold". Cold to me denotes strength, making them sexy." Alright, so we've both admitted it. Strength and power make men sexy. And I submit that the Malfoys have these. The cold gray eyes, the cruelty, heck, Mandy even says: "All I can do is speak for myself and for me it's always the bad guys. Hey I even find Lord Voldemort attractive ..trust me it's the power thing .it is really..." So how *can* she resist the Malfoys? I swear I don't know. Mandy: > JKR, in her last interview at the Royal Albert Hall, said we are all getting far too fond of Draco, and I'm convinced it's because of the movies, as in the books he is still this weak little twerp. So, to follow the books alone Draco should only now becoming attractive to us, but I confess he's been an attraction > since just after GoF, when the first movie came out. Erin: There are fanfics from *way* before the movies that depict Draco as attractive. Mandy > Now what about Snape? In the books he is definitly ugly and very > unattractive. JKR takes every opportunity to describe him as such, > but in the movie...Alan Rickman, although not a handsome man in the > conventional sense, is very attractive and damned sexy. Does he > qualify? Erin: I can trace my Snape-crush, oh yes. And it's not from the movies. It's from July of 2000, while reading GoF, when I came across a little chapter called the Egg and the Eye. Alan Rickman has nothing to do with it. From zanelupin at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 05:41:22 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 05:41:22 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black and Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84369 Mandy: >Along with Sirius, Lupin and Peter the Lexicon has made assumptions about which houses a lot of characters belonged to. E.g. Lucius and Narcissa Malfoy and the Lestranges. Of course it's not a huge leap of faith to think Lucius and the Lestranges were in Slytherin but it is not yet canon as nowhere in the books does it state categorically that they were. Also as we now nothing about Narcissa it is wrong to place her in any particular house yet.< KathyK: Actually there is canon for both the placement of the Malfoys and the Lestranges into House Slytherin: SS, US Paperback 77, Draco says about his family in Slytherin: "Well, no one really knows until they get there, do they, but I know I'll be in Slytherin, all our family have been" Whether or not this refers to both Lucius and Narcissa is up for debate, I suppose, but I'd bet they're both from Slytherin. Draco ought to know, don't you think? GoF, US Paperback 531, Sirius on Snape: "and he was part of a gang of Slytherins who nearly all turned out to be Death Eaters." And then Sirius lists their names, including: "The Lestranges--they're a married couple--they're in Azkaban." Sounds like the Lexicon has done no assuming as far as they're concerned, either. KathyK, who tends to put MWPP all in Gryffindor From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 22:18:25 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 22:18:25 -0000 Subject: First name adressing = same House? In-Reply-To: <161.27b7dc8e.2cdc3181@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84370 > Actually, JKR has stated in at least one interview (Barnes & Noble, 10/20/02) > that Hagrid was a Gryffindor - so sayeth the Lexicon. > > Also - did Riddle call him "Rubeus" in the book? (It's been a while since > I've read that one.) I thought he called him "Hagrid". > > Sherrie They do definitely use first names. Here's the beginning of the passage: "Evening, Rubeus," said Riddle sharply. The boy slammed the door shut and stood up. "What yer doin' down here, Tom?" (CS 246, Am. edition) I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that Tom addresses Hagrid as "Rubeus" because Hagrid is three years younger and in a lower class both socially and academically so for him it's a sign of his "superiority." Guileless Hagrid calls Riddle "Tom" because he thinks Riddle is his friend (even though Tom is falsely accusing Aragog, Hagrid doesn't sense an ulterior motive or underlying contempt for his origins). So first names don't indicate being in the same house, but they do indicate the speaker's attitude toward the other person--sort of like the use of the familiar form of "you" in languages that make that distinction. Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 8 00:42:47 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 00:42:47 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84371 > Susan again: > But I don't believe the sorting hat necessarily puts family members > all in the same house. I believe it evaluates each *individual* in > determining where to place him or her. Yes, all the Weasleys ended > up in Gryffindor, and probably most of the Blacks in Slytherin. But > I still think the hat is "smart" enough to know when a member of a > family comes along who's *different*.... > Geoff: I seem to recall from canon (but can't put my finger on it at 00:42 hours GMT) that the Patil sisters are in different houses....... From offworld_xanatos at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 23:42:56 2003 From: offworld_xanatos at yahoo.com (Xanatos) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:42:56 -0000 Subject: Rowling's politics (Was I know Molly.....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84372 > > I think her left-wing political views are pretty transparent via > > Hermione, whom I liked better when she wasn't so self-righteously > > defending the rights of house elves. Now Erin: > I have to say I was pretty surprised the first time I read GoF, > and no one wanted to join SPEW. I would have jumped right on > board. But it may be that I am influenced overmuch by > living in the American south, where you can't really escape the > history we have here. > > You know, I also doubt very much that American wizards keep House- > elves. Now me (xan): The impression I get from the books is that the WW just doesn't consider the house-elves to be even close to the same level as humans, and therefore are not worthy of rights. American slavery and other labor injustices (the anti-Irish prejudice for instance) recongnized the victims as human, just an inferior form of human. The WW seems to place elves as being on the same plane as talking mirrors and enchanted self-cleaning pots. We muggles instantly see the injustice because we can see that the house elves are sentient beings. Wizards (most of them anyway) do not. I don't agree with the wizarding view and think the elves should be freed, but I think that a VERY radical shift in thinking in the WW needs to occur before that can happen. I too would like to see an American wizard take on this. Would they follow wizarding tradition or adopt an American standard? Do any characters aligned with the good side have house-elves? Malfoys and the Crouchs do, and of course the Blacks. What about the Weasleys or any of the members of the Order? Do they ever mention owning house-elves? Is it a matter of not being able to afford one, or a matter of not wanting to enslave them? I did wonder how Hogwarts managed food and laundry for all the students, but assumed it was paid human staff. How did Hogwarts end up with house-elves? > "justcarol67": > Her dislike of government interference in education is also > apparent throughout OoP. Now Erin: > Again, maybe this is relating to something in the British > political landscape that I, as an American, As far as I > know, my government isn't trying to invade the schools and > surpress evidence of the return of an evil wanna-be overlord. New me (xan): As a fellow American, I can cite a few instances of an overbearing government invading schools. In the state of Kansas a few years ago, it was illegal to teach evolution. Whole new schoolbooks had to be edited and purchased so that the students would not be accidently exposed to the theory. (the law has since been repealed and they are teaching evolution again) While Umbridge and the MOM went way overboard, things like that do happen. Sometimes only through exaggeration can we get the idea to look a little closer to reality. xan From furkin1712 at aol.com Sat Nov 8 00:06:15 2003 From: furkin1712 at aol.com (furkin1712 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 19:06:15 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius' mother, important Order helper? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84373 In Regards to Mrs. Black's Portrait: > If I remember correctly, this would prevent sound from coming in, or > out. And they'd like to keep her wailing in. Depends on whether > Rowling's wishes override those of the characters, I guess. >? >? -M.M. (snip) What if the entire point of having the portrait is for it to help? What if Mrs. Black's ranting and raving might actually have a purpose? I mean, I think JK would realize that there are things she can do to the portrait to shut it up without taking it off the wall. If memory serves Mrs. Black blasted Sirius' name off of the family tree.... what's stopping Sirius or Dumbledore from blasting her portrait into cinders? I'll tell you what is: JKR's pen. The revelation struck me that alot of times we don't give JKR enough credit. For example, she didn't need for Harry to give Dobby the sock, but if she hadn't Harry would be in a pickle in Book 4. We didn't see in book 2 that Dobby's freedom was of any consiquence, we just assumed it was yet another heroic deed to put to Harry's name but Dobby was responsible for the gillyweed. Well Moddy was techincally responsible for it but he used Dobby as a puppet because teachers weren't supposed to be helping the students. And speaking of Moody. We didn't think that the polyjuice potion would come back to nip us in the butt, but it did in book 4. And in Book 1, we never really regarded the letter Dumbledore left on Harry as all that important, just explaining to the Dursleys that Lily and James were dead and Harry needed a home. But that letter was Harry's salvation, without living where his mother's blood dwells Harry would've been killed by Voldemort, we learned this in Book 5. So getting back to Mrs. Black, there are so many ways that JKR could've quieted her.... is there a reason for letting her shout? Blue Eyes [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nibleswik at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 01:42:18 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 01:42:18 -0000 Subject: Evil Slytherins: a generalization? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84374 Cheekyweebisom quoted: > > "There's not a witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't in > > Slytherin." -Hagrid in PS/SS Jessica replied: > I just had to respond to this post because I've been wondering the > same thing. I've always taken his statement to mean that every > witch or wizard who went bad came from Slytherin, not every Slytherin is > bad. No, no, I'm not saying that Hagrid's implying that all Slytherins are evil. He defends Snape in SS/PS. I just don't like his claim that all evils are Slytherin, even if all Slytherins aren't evil. Your quote backs me up: > the house that has turned out more dark witches and wizards than > any other See, this makes me happy. It makes me happy because it admits that all Gryffindors, Hufflepuffs, and Ravenclaws aren't all goodness and light. Cheekyweebisom From greatraven at hotmail.com Sat Nov 8 10:40:59 2003 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 10:40:59 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84375 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Geoff: > I seem to recall from canon (but can't put my finger on it at 00:42 > hours GMT) that the Patil sisters are in different houses....... Sue B You're quite right, Geoff - it's in GoF, where Parvati asks her Ravenclaw sister, Padma, to go to the Yule Ball with Ron. And - I can't put my finger on it - there's actually a discussion on it, probably in the same novel, where Hermione says siblings don't necessarily end up in the same house, and cites the Patil sisters as an example. The impression I got, too, even in PS, was that younger siblings weren't sure where they were going to end up, but hoped they'd be in the same one. From constancevigilance at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 11:24:08 2003 From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:24:08 -0000 Subject: FILK: Down the Un-Rabbit Hole with Malice Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84377 Down the Un-Rabbit Hole with Malice (to the tune of White Rabbit, of course) The scene: The Great Concert Happening on the Grass at Hogsmeadstock Jefferson Broomstick is on stage. Grace Switch takes the mic ..... One vial takes you forward And one vial takes you back Two others are the answer If nettlewine's your lack Go ask Hermione When the deck is stacked. And if you go chasing Dark Lords Who might be coming back Tell 'em a poisonous potion master Is Voldemort's pet hack Call Hermione She's got the puzzle crack'd When the men on the chessboard Get up and pound you blow by blow And you've just left Ron unconscious And you've nowhere else to go Go ask Hermione I think she'll know When logic and a potion Have served you in good stead And poor Quirrell is walking backward and the Dark Lord's on his head Remember what Albus said Erised! Keep your head! Constance Vigilance, who was amazed at how little was necessary to alter from the original words for this filk! (Reposted because I forgot to provide the name of the tune for the X- gen-ers who never knew the 60's. And for the others of us who lived through them but are foggy on the details.) From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 01:14:24 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 01:14:24 -0000 Subject: Speaking up for Petunia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84378 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jennifer" wrote: > I agree with oiboyz in the fact that Dudley is not a wizard, because > I agree that Dumbledore would not deny any magical person their > birthright. Although, what I could see had happened is that Petunia > is a squib. Look how bitter it has made Filtch. Being denied what > her sister had could have made her hate what she really wanted the > most. Petunia hates her sister and hates magic why? Because she was > denied it, she could never be like her sister and never would have > the ablities of her sister. Who is older? Petunia or Lily? Have we > ever found out? If Petunia is older and her parents had a squib, no > wonder in Petunia's mind that her parents were proud to have a witch > in the family because they didn't with her. She is jealous through > and through. Didn't Snape call Lily a "mudblood" and hasn't JKR herself referred to Harry as a "half-blood"? In other words one parent was a wizard/witch and the other was a muggle (or in this case muggleborn). Lily was a witch, not a muggle, I would think that would make Harry a full-blooded wizard, but apparently in the purity conscious WW having a muggleborn parent still makes you a "half-blood". Lily was a muggleborn witch which would make her parents muggles. Since squibs are only born in magical families, Petunia doesn't qualify as a squib. Yolanda From moorequests at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 02:16:07 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 02:16:07 -0000 Subject: Rowling's politics (Was I know Molly.....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84379 M.M. wrote: > > The worst type of book, in my opinion, is a pedantic, overly > > preachy one. Thank God Harry Potter is not. > > > > Carol: > I think her left-wing political views are pretty transparent via > Hermione, whom I liked better when she wasn't so self-righteously > defending the rights of house elves. (I'm not attacking her views, > just wishing she had left them out of the book.) Her dislike of > government interference in education is also apparent throughout OoP. > Fortunately she made Umbridge into a character you love to hate. But I > do feel at times that she (Rowling) is as preachy as Percy at > times--and utterly in favor of rule breaking. > Hm.... I think there's an article you should really read. Rowling herself addresses this in Oprah's magazine. She may have an answer for you. Here's the URL: http://www.oprah.com/obc/omag/obc_omag_200101_books_02.jhtml;jsessioni d==RDPJZLRNNJOMZLARAYIRNW Exact quote I'm referring to is: "O: I think one reason your books are so popular is that they're not sanitized. They're very real. JKR: I think so. I hope so. The funny thing is, I have people saying to me, 'Oh, so you're an apologist for boarding schools?' No! See, you laugh. In America, people laugh. In Britain, it's a big deal. In Britain, it's, 'Aha! So which boarding school did you go to?' I didn't go to boarding school. Harry Potter has to be set in a boarding school for reasons of plot. How would it be interesting if the characters couldn't get up at night and wander around? You're going to have them go to a day school and trot home, and then break into school every night? And then you have people who think the books are too dark, too scary. After The Chamber of Secrets was published, this grandmother wrote to me and said, 'I was appalled to see you encouraging joyriding.' It was like, 'Okay, hello?!' I read the letter, and for a moment I thought, 'Where did I say joyriding was good?' And then I realized, it's a very, very literal approach to things. Harry steals a car, so it's good to steal cars?no! I didn't say that." END QUOTE Carol: > I hope the last two books are less overtly political and concentrate > more on the characters and the essential elements of the story. No > more spew, please. (Sorry, Hermione. I know it's S.P.E.W., but I'm > with Ron on this.) M.M. (me) See, with your point on S.P.E.W.- I have to laugh. I think she's making it annoying for a reason, partially because she herself is annoyed by that part of Hermione. How can an author be annoyed by her own character? Well, this sounds stupid, but sometimes we create characters that seem to live and breathe and do things that we ourselves are annoyed with, and we don't know exactly WHY. Just like a person. And we don't always agree with them, we just let the story tell itself. I think it may be that way with Rowling and Hermione. Sometimes I get the feeling that she is just as annoyed with Hermione and S.P.E.W. as we are. Stephen King talks about the concept of "discovered or found stories" in his book, On Writing- I take that one further, and I think of it as "found characters." You will find a place in that interview with Rowling and Oprah where Oprah asks Rowling why Harry was a boy. Rowling responds, "Because that's how he came." I understand. You can't change a character's nature- nor his age, his sex, his race- they just ARE. Hermione is as she is. I am probably coming across as extremely bizarre to some of you. Well, I'm not Luna, but I am a writer, so yes, I am bizarre. I wouldn't have it any other way. As for Rowling's political beliefs, she's pretty good at keeping them out of the book and letting them speak through the consequences of the actions of her characters. Other authors have not been so good (C.S. Lewis, for one.) However, Aslan as Dumbledore does speak a bit of the same type of message, and Nearly Headless Nick took a few words of wisdom too, in book 5. She sees fit to use her characters as her own mouthpiece when she needs to, and I think this is really the best way. We are undergoing a time in history that closely parallels many of the events in her books, although it also parallels other events of the 20th century as well. What makes these books classic is that their issues will remain relevant for years to come. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic. -- Arthur C. Clarke From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 8 10:56:04 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 10:56:04 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84380 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" wrote: > Sue B > > You're quite right, Geoff - it's in GoF, where Parvati asks her > Ravenclaw sister, Padma, to go to the Yule Ball with Ron. And - I > can't put my finger on it - there's actually a discussion on it, > probably in the same novel, where Hermione says siblings don't > necessarily end up in the same house, and cites the Patil sisters as > an example. The impression I got, too, even in PS, was that younger > siblings weren't sure where they were going to end up, but hoped > they'd be in the same one. Thanks. You're right. Now that I'm looking at things at a sensible(?) hour, I've tracked the relevant bit down: "'Hi,Colin," said Harry warily. 'Harry, guess what?... My brother's starting! My brother Dennis!' 'Er - good,' said Harry. 'He's really excited!' said Colin..... 'I just hope he's in Gryffindor!.....' 'Er - yeah, all right,' said Harry. He turned back to Hermione, Ron and Nearly Headless Nick. 'Brothers and sisters usually go in the same houses, don't they?' he said. He was judging by the Weasleys, all seven of whom had been put into Gryffindor. 'Oh, no, not necessarily,' said Hermione. 'Parvati Patil's twin's in Ravenclaw.....'" It's at the Sorting Ceremony in GOF (p.154 UK edition). Daft thing is, I'm reading GOF again and went through that page about two days ago. My radar must have been switched off! Geoff From moorequests at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 02:39:24 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 02:39:24 -0000 Subject: SHIP SHIP HOORAY!!! was TIPS - and traps In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84381 > moorequests====== > As for there being 'canon' for every ship out there... > frankly, there has not been canon for a Harry/Hermione > relationship ever since the books started. There has > been canon for a Harry/Hermione friendship. I know some > of you want to roast me on this- go ahead. > > Samnanya > ================= > IMO Hermione prefers Harry to Ron, and I presented my > arguments for this in 79495. This is not denying that > there are many clues for other ships as well, and I feel > that no reader should be suprised WHATEVER the outcome. > Rebuttals to HH ship relating to my response in 79497 > and 79521. M.M. Can you please quote me the relevant parts you find most strongly enforce your argument? I don't find numbers to be very convincing. While I appreciate being given the numbers, I don't really know what part of the posts you are referring, and it would be difficult for me to create a post of rebuttal to your argument. I supplied many different examples of Harry's indifferance to Ron and Hermione's relationship, their jealousy of each other when dating/flirting with others, and their ability to be in close physical contact without feeling the slightest bit uncomfortable, even when young adolescents. This should really send a message about the lack of sexual tension. The only quotes I HAVE found are those that support friendship, which there are plenty of. However, if you want to continue this discussion, please do supply me with some quotes from either the books or from your previous posts, so I have somewhere to begin. > Samnanya > The RH vs HH argument goes more to the "opposites > attract" (RH) vs. "will Harry ever get his head out of > his butt and notice that Hermione really does love him?" > (HH) schools of thought. And if you think that there isnt > at least SOME attraction between Hermione and Harry, at > least on Hermione's part, well... M.M. I am sorry, your last line just seems to be implying that *I* should get my head out of my butt. If that is true, then you must at least present some evidence on behalf of your case. :) All I really can reply is that I honestly have nothing invested in either relationship- I call it like I read it, and I have read nothing between Harry and Hermione. The strongest evidence lies in the fact that Rowling herself has said in seperate interviews that she identifies with both Harry and Hermione, and has put large parts of herself in both characters. You can find these statements, well, one of them, in the Albert Hall interview, I believe, given this past June. As for the other, that will require a bit more searching, and I'll do my best to pull it up. But I believe the exact statement she made was something along the lines of the fact that Harry had a lot of herself in him- that was why it was so easy for her to write from a young boy's perspective. As for Hermione, she mentioned that she used to be a lot like her when she was younger. I also made connections when I realized that both Harry and Hermione's deepest fears are essentially the same- Harry is most afraid of the Dementors, which Lupin realizes, signify fear itself. What is Hermione most afraid of? Fear also- her boggart turned into McGonagall who told her bad news about her exam. After thinking this over, I realized Harry and Hermione really are based on Rowling. Then I turned to Ron's boggart for comparison. What is it? Spiders. It is true that some romantic relationships can be quiet, rather than based on opposite attraction, but there must at least be a spark, somewhere, and I don't think there can be a spark there when the basic soul of both characters is Rowling herself. Perhaps other writers might be able to confirm these statements for you. Or, if you try writing a story, put in two characters, a boy and a girl, and base one upon one part of yourself, and give the other another part of your personality. Let the story grow, develop, and flourish; I think you will see, if you give the characters free will, that they will not seek each other out for romance. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Understanding how we write teaches us how to read: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join From moorequests at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 03:09:10 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 03:09:10 -0000 Subject: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84382 > > Plump, warm, nurturing > > Molly is the opposite of bony, cold, prison-warden Aunt Petunia. > justcarol67: > Excellent point (but please don't assume that bony women can't be > motherly!). It's not just Petunia's treatment of Harry that's involved > here. Look how she treats her own son. Imagine her sending him the > muggle equivalent of a howler, if there were such a thing. She doesn't > discipline Dudley in any way (except for the grapefruit diet ordered > by the school). Till then she probably sent him sweets--as Draco's > mother also does. > Carol: Petunia may have the best of intentions when it comes to Dudley, but he really grew up as abused as Harry did. Only he was abused on the opposite side of the scale. He was overindulged, in almost every way, in every whim, and that is worse for many children than to grow up as Harry did- underindulged, forced to fight for survival. Harry grew up with a keen sense of his own self worth and place in the world, but Dudley? He grew up a callous bully, who is afraid of his own shadow, who's never had to really fight for anything, and, if he was really in danger of death, would die if no one else were around to rescue him. If that happened, both Vernon and Petunia would have no idea why; or they'd blame it on Harry, if possible. Never would they think to question their own indulgent style of parenting which left the poor boy without a resource. Dudley in the books is a cruel bully, yet I cannot help pitying him, because he never had a chance. I think the lessons Roald Dahl tried to teach us in Charlie and the Chocolate Factory apply to the Dursleys' job of raising Dudley. Too much indulgence= spoiled child. You can spoil a child by too much television (Mike TeeVee) too many sweets (Augustus Gloop) too much everything (Veruca Salt) or too much bubble gum (Violet Beauregarde). And little Charlie Bucket was the only one who had ethics, morals, and manners. Somehow those come with the suffering and difficulty of a hard life- or else with parents who are too smart to overindulge. Getting the right balance is a difficult one, but essential to a happy childhood. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Have patience with all things, but first of all with yourself. -- St. Francis de Sales From moorequests at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 02:51:27 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 02:51:27 -0000 Subject: How are we going to Kill Voldemort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84383 now Phil (confusinglyso) with a large pinch of salt. > > Dumbledore has said to Lord Thingy that there are worse things than > death. Lord Voldemort's payback will involve MUGGLES, the ultimate > disgrace from his point of view. > Phil... How I loved this ending! :) It reminds me of one of my own. I hope the mods will be kind enough to let it through this time. I too envision an ending where Lord Voldy is tortured by Muggles. However, it's not conventional torture. It's the one the Addams Family children had to undergo at summer camp. Strapped down and forced to watch hour after hour of Brady Bunch reruns in a little hut... the Happy Hut I think it was called. Watching hour after hour of non-dysfunctional family television...MUGGLE TELEVISON... now that's enough to leave a scar. -M.M. ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Discuss Harry Potter and Rowling's writing style! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HP_Writers_Group/join From silver_owl_01 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 03:56:03 2003 From: silver_owl_01 at yahoo.com (silver_owl_01) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 03:56:03 -0000 Subject: Malfoys on Weasleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84384 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yolandacarroll" wrote: > One possible solution of course would be magic, but what if for > whatever reason, a curse for instance, that wouldn't work. > > My problem is you would think they would have potions and/or charms > for that sort of thing. Then again, magic has limits in HP's world. > Maybe, just like for muggles, some couples can use fertility > treatments and others no matter what they try will never get pregnant > or in this case pregnant again. > > Can't you just see it? Lucius and Narcissa spending pounds and > pounds of gold only to finally have to accept that Draco will always > be an only child. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Ron said something in CoS to the effect that if the wizards hadn't married muggles they would've died out? Considering how racist wizards seem to be, I would imagine that if any other option to intermarriage existed they would've taken it. The same goes to mixed marriages with other species, like giants. This would lead to the conclusion that the wizarding world doesn't have some form of magic fertility treatment, otherwise they would've used it long ago to increase their diminishing numbers. From dean7712000 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 06:48:34 2003 From: dean7712000 at yahoo.com (Dean) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 06:48:34 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore's glint Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84385 Reading the books again a thought occured to me I think that the reason for Dumbledore's glint may be related to the nature of the killing curse. We have been told that if the killing curse hits you your dead no matter what, so I'm assuming that if you get hit in the foot your dead. Taking this one step further if the killing curse hit one blood cell (u see what im getting at now) you would be dead. From this you would assume that Harry could not cast the killing curse on Voldie without killing him self. If this was to work in reverse it would create an interesting promblem for Dumbledore namely if he should tell Voldie. If Voldie was informed it would make killing Harry more difficult but if Voldie was not told he could accidentally kill him self. This could explain Dumbledore saying that he "loves Harry too much" at the end of OotF. If Dumbledore was to take this one step further he could murder Harry ending all the problems in the wizarding world. I know that's not going to happen but it would create an interesting problem What do you think? Dean From strawberryshaunie at yahoo.ca Sat Nov 8 11:28:49 2003 From: strawberryshaunie at yahoo.ca (strawberryshaunie) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:28:49 -0000 Subject: Gryiffindor ain't so great Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84386 Is Gryffindor really all that wonderful? If any of the four founders of Hogwarts are to be given any credit for being "noble" or "wise" it is Helga Hufflepuff. She seems to be the only one with any sense of justice and equality (without using direct canon, I remember that her house was described as the one that accepted pretty much anyone, regardless of lineage, "intelligence" or "bravery". She seemes to value hard work and loyalty above other more superficial qualities). Ravenclaw only accepts those deemed clever enough, and there's no need to point out the shortcomings of Salazar Slytherin (I really pity everyone in Slytherin house, it can't be easy belonging to the most hated group; no wonder they're such an unpleasant-looking lot). However, I am most disturbed by the fact that Gryffindor's acceptance of only the brave and daring (or something to that effect) is seen as a good thing. Yes, courage and the ability to stand up for one's beliefs are important and admirable qualities, but shouldn't everyone have the same chance? Why not give everyone the same start in Hogwarts life, what's the point of separating the "clever" from the "brave" from the "ambitious" from the "loyal"? Students that possess all these different qualities should have the opportunity to really work together, playing off one another's strengths, making up for one another's weaknesses, etc. It has been said (many times now) by someone (I fail to recall who, exactly, or when) that Harry, Ron, Herm, & Luna together are the soul, heart, mind, and intuition respectively. could one not say that the mind, heart, will and soul of hogwarts are Ravenclaw, Hufflepuff, Slytherin & Gryffindor? I think all of them are quite useless on their own and could learn a lesson from Helga...I'm sure the sorting hat would agree. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 19:38:27 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 19:38:27 -0000 Subject: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84387 In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" wrote: > > Molly's character is the anti-Aunt Petunia. She is a caring > mother > > to all of her children and to their close friends. She includes > > Harry at gift-giving occasions and worries about him when their is > > trouble. Molly is the kind of care-giver that young Harry never > knew! > > Karen: > > All the more reason for Harry to end up with Ginny eventually; it > would make him a part of the big, loving family he never had before. And don't forget Trelawney's prediction that he'll have twelve children! (Joking, but that for me was the funniest moment in all the books.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 20:57:15 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 20:57:15 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84388 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonya Minton" > wrote: > > Are we in agreement that Sirius Black was in Slytherin house?? > > No!!! > > Siriusly Snapey Susan > ...who, in spite of her moniker, does not imagine those two in the > same house. Lupin was made a Gryffindor prefect to keep an eye on his friends, which suggest to me that Sirius must also have been a Gryffindor (and we know that James was). I can't imagine James associating with him if he were in Slytherin. No doubt his brother Regulus was, though. Peter must have been in Gryffindor, too--a case of the Sorting Hat being wrong? (I'm thinking that the four of them shared a room, rather like Harry, Ron, et al. Only four Gryffindor boys in that year? Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 22:59:07 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 22:59:07 -0000 Subject: sexism in the WW (Was I know Molly.....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84389 > It is interesting (and I picked this up on first reading) that when > they're in the kitchen of Grimmauld Place, and Molly's getting > dinner, just like she always does, Tonks is the only auror who > springs up and asks what she can do to help. This is after Tonks had > a really long, hard day, too. I notice women in both the Wizarding > World and the Muggle World tend to assume responsibility for the care > and feeding of their families... and Tonks is even unmarried. > I'm not talking about blatent sexism here, but latent, and > sometimes that's harder to ferret out and realize rather than the > other kind. > I think that Tonks and Hermione are just more aware than the men and boys of how much work is involved in preparing a meal. It reminds me of a muggle Thanksgiving in America. In my experience, the female guests will always volunteer to help the hostess peel the potatoes and set the table or whatever, as an act of courtesy. The male guests will always sit in the living room with the hostess's husband, watching TV(they're muggles, after all) or talking. Seldom will a male over the age of twelve volunteer to help with the dinner. Maybe they know they'll be asked to stay out of the way. Maybe they don't want their masculinity challenged. Whatever the reason, the situation at Grimmauld Place is very similar. At least, though, the boys do help Molly de-doxify the curtains and so on. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 02:25:30 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 02:25:30 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84390 > Now what about Snape? In the books he is definitly ugly and very > unattractive. JKR takes every opportunity to describe him as such, > but in the movie...Alan Rickman, although not a handsome man in the > conventional sense, is very attractive and damned sexy. Does he > qualify? > > Handsome is in the eye of the beholder right? So just who qualifies > as handsome? And how do men and women differ in who qualifies? All I > can do is speak for myself and for me it's always the bad guys. Hey I > even find Lord Voldemort attractive ..trust me it's the power > thing .it is really .OK .I'm leaving now. > But Snape has attractions other than handsomeness, the biggest of which (to me) is the aura of mystery that surrounds him. There's also his intelligence, his many gifts as a wizard, his silky voice and sinuous movements. Yes, I know he can be cruel, but you can't imagine him making a student write lines in his own blood as Umbridge did. (I confess, though, my mental image of him has been influenced by Alan Rickman, who, as you say, is a very sexy man. It's interesting to me that JKR approved him for the role. I know she didn't originally intend him as an attractive character, but maybe she's beginning to understand his appeal. There's more to a work of literature than the author's intention, after all, or we would be stuck with the author's comments as the only authority and our own interpretations would be pointless. To return to what Mandy is saying, the power element may even play a role in some readers attraction to Snape--he can control his classes without raising his voice and cow a student with a look. That's not the center of his appeal, but it may be a part. If his fate bears any relation to his looks, then the uglier JKR thinks he is, the better! Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 23:04:42 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 23:04:42 -0000 Subject: O.W.L. exams In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84391 -> > Sue B: > Of course, Hogwarts staff are not too lazy to change > > the papers every year. Even young witches and wizards are children > > and if they could cheat they probably would, just like any other > > kids! ;-) In a family the size of the Weasleys', older brothers and > > sisters would certainly tell younger siblings, even if they didn't > > have the papers. Which is one reason why anti-cheating spells are placed on the papers. And of course it would be hard to cheat in the practical portion of the exams, unless you can somehow put a spell on your own wand to prevent it from creating a flock of flamingoes. Carol From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Sat Nov 8 12:16:51 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 12:16:51 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84392 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > But I don't believe the sorting hat necessarily puts family members > all in the same house. I believe it evaluates each *individual* in > determining where to place him or her. Yes, all the Weasleys ended > up in Gryffindor, and probably most of the Blacks in Slytherin. But > I still think the hat is "smart" enough to know when a member of a > family comes along who's *different*.... > > Siriusly Snapey Susan Now me : Sirius probably hated his family even before attending Hogwarts. Remember that he was not his mother's favourite son. And he could also disagree with their opinions concerning Dark Magic. Couldn't we then imagine that he asked the Sorting Hat to put him in Gryffindor? If all the Balcks used to go to Slytherin, it was a nice way to bother them or to show them he disagreed with their ideas. It was an act of rebellion, and a matter of choice. On that last point, if that theory was true, it would be an interesting parallel with Harry. Amicalement, Iris From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 7 19:03:21 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 19:03:21 -0000 Subject: Wormtail's silver hand (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84393 Iggy McSnurd: > > Hmmm... Silver hand on a Wizard... Silver vs. Werewolves... > > > > Think Wormtail might be assigned to make an assassination attempt on > Lupin? > > > > *hrm* Carol: > > I notice that no one responded to this post, but I've been wondering > the same thing, so I revived it. I realize that Lupin in his human > form is apparently immune to silver (and actually strengthened by > wolfsbane, which ought to be poisonous to a wolf if not to a > werewolf), but the silver hand, which seems to have unusual strength > as well as beauty, certainly seems like the ideal weapon to destroy > Lupin in his werewolf form. In other words, I think Iggy is on to > something. (I do think that Peter will die trying to save Harry, but > that won't prevent him from going after Lupin first.) I'd appreciate > your responses on this. (I'm assuming that Lupin isn't ESE.) Still no takers? Let me ask more simply then. Does anyone think that Wormtail is going to kill Lupin with his silver hand? Why or why not? A related question regarding Sirius's schoolboy "prank": If Snape were a vampire, couldn't he have fought werewolf Lupin in that form? If we're going by folklore, nothing can kill a vampire but a stake of holly to the heart, right? Why would he have needed to learn occlumency or any form of defense against the dark arts if he were virtually immortal? Carol P.S. If there's a vampire in this story, it ought to be Karkaroff! But since he's a coward and fled Voldemort's revenge, he probably isn't. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Nov 8 14:24:06 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 14:24:06 -0000 Subject: TIPS - and traps - IN WORKING OUT CLUES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84394 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "samnanya" wrote: > > and finally, > You cant apparate in Hogwarts (its been said so many > times by so many different characters that I am > suspicious, but thats me) > I have a suspicion about this too, but from a different aspect. So far as I can recall, all discussions, statements or references re apparating and Hogwarts *in the canon* seem to refer to apparating into or out of Hogwarts. No one in the books has actually said that purely internal apparating is not possible. I wait with bated breath for someone to prove me wrong. Kneasy From amani at charter.net Sat Nov 8 14:52:05 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 09:52:05 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Fear & Boggarts WAS: SHIP SHIP HOORAY!!! was TIPS - and traps References: Message-ID: <001d01c3a607$e0dd7ea0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84395 M.M: I also made connections when I realized that both Harry and Hermione's deepest fears are essentially the same- Harry is most afraid of the Dementors, which Lupin realizes, signify fear itself. What is Hermione most afraid of? Fear also- her boggart turned into McGonagall who told her bad news about her exam. Taryn: Wait, how is this an example of Hermione's biggest fear being fear itself? It sure looks to me that her biggest fear is failure. ---------- Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 15:38:29 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 15:38:29 -0000 Subject: Molly and Sirius redux Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84396 I feel kind of bad about the firestorm I accidentally seem to have provoked with my posts (83940 et al.) a while back about Sirius vs Molly. My point was to argue that Molly behaved inappropriately when she tried to interfere with Sirius's relationshipp with Harry. It certainly wasn't to disparage stay-at-home mothers or to suggest that JRK had some kind of "feminist" political intent when she created the WW. I think we have to be very careful when we assign any character in canon the place of an archetype. First of all, canon's not complete, so we can't really say yet with any certainty what JKR's ultimate message(s) will be, although we can theorize. Second, the realness, the individuality and the quirkiness of the characters in HP are a large part of what makes it such compelling reading. To strip those characters of their uniqueness and say that they only represent some larger moral construct would be to lose a lot of the joy of the books, imo. Molly is a very real character to me-in all of her strengths and weaknesses. Clearly she loves her family above all else, and clearly they are the better for that. Her kids have learned to handle her overprotective behavior in a variety of ways, mostly with pretty good humor (Ron has flashes of irritability, but that's understandable). The Weasleys have worked out a way of living together with mutual love and respect that works for them. Harry is the willing and lucky beneficiary of this loving relationship, and thank goodness they're around! But...I wish Molly could have seen that Sirius longed for the same thing with Harry that she had with her family. I think she made a bad situation worse when she could have made it better. She has great stores of love and compassion in her-where did they go when Harry needed them? If you don't like or trust Sirius, then you think Molly was right. I like and trust him, and I think she was, uncharacteristically, selfish and wrong. Laura, hoping to bring peace... From grianne2 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 15:58:58 2003 From: grianne2 at yahoo.com (Annalisa Moretti) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 15:58:58 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84397 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote: > Mandy: > > JKR, in her last interview at the Royal Albert Hall, said we are > all getting far too fond of Draco, and I'm convinced it's because of > the movies, as in the books he is still this weak little twerp. > > So, to follow the books alone Draco should only now becoming > attractive to us, but I confess he's been an attraction > > since just after GoF, when the first movie came out. > > Erin: > There are fanfics from *way* before the movies that depict Draco as > attractive. Too true (And by the way, to Mandy, there was a space of about a year or more between GoF's release and the first movie hitting theaters). Personally I mostly find Draco to be a great big shithead, but I understand the attraction purely from the books. I kind of like bad guys too. And there's just something so funny about Draco. Especially in Order of the Pheonix, the terrible way he makes fun of Hermione in Care of Magical Creatures (jumping up and down waving his hand around) and when he whispers "*Remedial Potions?*" to Harry during his Occlumency lesson ... I'd like to see him get a kick in the ass but at the same time I'm fond of him because he's so well-written in these scenes. He's very evocative of a lot of the petty boys I knew in high school. He acts like a rotten little teenager, and I just enjoy reading that. But I also can see why people might think or hope that his character might have a turnabout. If Draco starting working for the good guys, we'd get to cheer him on, and at the same time, enjoy him being a bastard. (Think: the antagonism between Spike and Angel or Xander or Giles in Buffyverse, post-chip). > Mandy > > Now what about Snape? In the books he is definitly ugly and very > > unattractive. JKR takes every opportunity to describe him as such, > > but in the movie...Alan Rickman, although not a handsome man in the > > conventional sense, is very attractive and damned sexy. Does he > > qualify? > > Erin: > I can trace my Snape-crush, oh yes. And it's not from the movies. > It's from July of 2000, while reading GoF, when I came across a > little chapter called the Egg and the Eye. Alan Rickman has nothing > to do with it. I've had a major crush on Snape since reading PoA, which I did right after GoF came out (I hadn't been more than a casual fan until then, when I went out and bought the third book in response to all the fun hype for GoF's release ... and after that I was hooked). That is when the true complexity of Snape's character first starts to shine through. He was always the most, shall we say, mysterious character in the first two books, but upon reading PoA I discovered (as did most people I'm sure) that his character had the admirable quality of conversely becoming even more mysterious and complex the more we learned about him. The revelation of his Death Eater past and his position of spy made him irresistable in GoF. Now as for his looks. There's no denying he isn't good-looking in the books. In some ways that makes him even more appealing to me. I could try to explain why, but I'm sure it's been done a million times. I'll simply say that my Snape, the Snape of my mind, my favorite Snape, doesn't look like Alan Rickman, although I enjoy Alan Rickman's portrayal a lot. (In fact, when if first saw AR in "Dogma", several months before PS casting was announced, I thought, he'd make a pretty good Snape.) He actually looks an awful lot like JKR's sketch of him. So in short, I don't mind his ugliness. Really, the only "ugly" thing about him is his nose. The rest of it is all lack of hygiene on his part, and that kind of inspires more pity than disgust in me. Especially since reading OotP. But that's for another post ;) - Annalisa From sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 8 16:01:40 2003 From: sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk (sachmet96) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 16:01:40 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84398 Iris > Now me : Sirius probably hated his family even before attending > Hogwarts. > Remember that he was not his mother's favourite son. And he could > also disagree with their opinions concerning Dark Magic. > Couldn't we then imagine that he asked the Sorting Hat to put him in > Gryffindor? If all the Balcks used to go to Slytherin, it was a nice > way to bother them or to show them he disagreed with their ideas. > It was an act of rebellion, and a matter of choice. On that last > point, if that theory was true, it would be an interesting parallel > with Harry. sachmet96 Maybe the hat puts the people in the house they want to be in (like he did with Harry) and not so much because of the abilities and character. That could explain Peter in Gryffindor. Or as Iris said Sirius placement in Gryffindor, but also Percy, Neville, and lots of Slytherins. I believe that could also be the reason why lots of siblings end up in the same house they 'want' to be there. It would be interesting what is more important for the hat the abilities or the wish of the student. I believe the later, because there are lots of people whoes most obvious ability would put them into a house they are not in. Like Neville in Hufflepuff, Hermione in Ravenclaw, Percy maybe Revenclaw or Slytherin,... From yswahl at stis.net Sat Nov 8 16:16:00 2003 From: yswahl at stis.net (samnanya) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 16:16:00 -0000 Subject: Open apology to M.M. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84399 Samnanya The RH vs HH argument goes more to the "opposites attract" (RH) vs. "will Harry ever get his head out of his butt and notice that Hermione really does love him?" (HH) schools of thought. And if you think that there isnt at least SOME attraction between Hermione and Harry, at least on Hermione's part, well... M.M. I am sorry, your last line just seems to be implying that *I* should get my head out of my butt. If that is true, then you must at least present some evidence on behalf of your case. :) Samnanya Please accept my apologies. I never ever intentionally try to insult any poster and if what I said, or in this case indirectly implied, caused offense I am mortified and ashamed. The last sentence of the post you quoted above dangled and was not meant to imply that anyone who disagrees with me has a {misplaced cranial appendage}. What I meant to say in conclusion was "well.... then there's no point of arguing because I can't convince you anyway. We are all entitled to our opinion." This was a case where "better left unsaid" was clearly not the best response. If you read the satire that I attached in my email to you, you will notice that my sense of humor {for what it is worth} leans towards sarcasm, which, as I am finding out, can be easily misinterpreted by the reader. You would also notice that I am not beyond satirizing my own opinions (evidence you will find in the second part of the satire). That said, I am truly sorry if you were offended. Please accept my apology. Samnanya From rredordead at aol.com Sat Nov 8 18:02:25 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 18:02:25 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84400 > Mandy wrote: > JKR, in her last interview at the Royal Albert Hall, said we are > all getting far too fond of Draco, and I'm convinced it's because > of the movies, as in the books he is still this weak little twerp. > So, to follow the books alone Draco should only now becoming > attractive to us, but I confess he's been an attraction > since just after GoF, when the first movie came out. > > Erin: > > There are fanfics from *way* before the movies that depict Draco as attractive. > Annalisa: > Too true snip And there's just something so funny about Draco. > I'd like to see him get a kick in the ass > but at the same time I'm fond of him because he's so well-written in these scenes. He's very evocative of a lot of the petty boys I knew in high school. He acts like a rottenlittle teenager, and I just enjoy reading that. > Erin again: > I can trace my Snape-crush, snip from July of 2000, while reading GoF,Alan Rickman has nothing to do with it. > Annalisa again: > I've had a major crush on Snape since reading PoA, which I did right after GoF came out. The revelation of his Death Eater past and his position of spy made him irresistable in GoF. Mandy again: Well, I certainly can't deny I was a little bit attracted to Snape and both Malfoys characters before the movies, but not so much the men themselves but the films certainly changed that and turned up the handsome, powerful male more than a few notches for me. But back to the books and JKR vision. I get the sense that all the *evil* or *bad* characters are handsome and attractive. Where as the *good* guys (and girls) are all plain looking and social misfits. The ones we have met seem to follow this rule anyway. Certainly all members of the Black family that we have met are described has having great beauty once, as in Sirius and Bellatrix's cases and Narcissa I believe was described as could have been quite good looking if she didn't look as if she had a nasty smell under her nose. (Sorry I don't have the book with me) I concede the Malfoys are good looking. (You are absolutely right about beautiful Orlando Bloom and his blond, and pale pointy face, Erin). Tom Riddle was described as a good-looking boy by Dumbledore. I can't imagine Bellatrix marring anything but a gorgeous Alpha male so I expect the Lestranges are good looking as well. Pansy Parkinson is only described as ugly by the girls not in Slytherin, just as she, in turn, describes Hermione as ugly and we know Hermione is not ugly. So I imagine Pansy to be very pretty. Besides I can't imagine Draco being seen with any girl who was not considered a 'catch'. Crabbe and Goyle are the only exception to the rule so far, that I can see. I imagine Voldemort's team being populated with these tall, gorgeous, superficially beautiful people with black hearts of coal and Dumbledore's side with short, plain looking good people. Do we really hate beautiful people that much? Do we all secretly long to be included with them? It's what makes the dark side so appealing and dangerous a threat I suppose. Personally my superficial self is itching to join the Death Eaters. Mandy From o_caipora at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 18:10:33 2003 From: o_caipora at yahoo.com (o_caipora) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 18:10:33 -0000 Subject: First name adressing = same House? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84401 "justcarol67" wrote: > So first names don't indicate being in the same house, but they do > indicate the speaker's attitude toward the other person--sort of > like the use of the familiar form of "you" in languages that > make that distinction. The British use first names less than Americans do. How much less only a Limey could tell you. In Kipling's boarding-school "Stalky" stories, the masters refer to the boys by their last names; brothers are distinguihed by appending "Major" "Minor" and "Tertius". The boys refer to the masters by surname. English does have a second person singular famililar form, and verbs even conjucate differently for it; it's "thou". Rarely used nowadays, of course, but it *is* there. - Caipora From rredordead at aol.com Sat Nov 8 18:18:16 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 18:18:16 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black and Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84402 > KathyK: > Actually there is canon for both the placement of the Malfoys and > the Lestranges into House Slytherin: > SS, US Paperback 77, Draco says about his family in Slytherin: > "Well, no one really knows until they get there, do they, but I know I'll be in Slytherin, all our family have been" > > Whether or not this refers to both Lucius and Narcissa is up for > debate, I suppose, but I'd bet they're both from Slytherin. Draco > ought to know, don't you think? > GoF, US Paperback 531, Sirius on Snape: > "and he was part of a gang of Slytherins who nearly all turned out > to be Death Eaters." > And then Sirius lists their names, including: > "The Lestranges--they're a married couple--they're in Azkaban." > > Sounds like the Lexicon has done no assuming as far as they're > concerned, either. Mandy again: I stand corrected on the Lestranges and on the Malfoys. But until I have page quotes for the fab four I'm still inclined to believe they were either all in Slytherin or in separate houses. Sirius and James behave unlike any of the Gryffindors we've read about in Harry's Hogwarts and most definitely behave like Draco and his pals. Mandy From rredordead at aol.com Sat Nov 8 18:40:51 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 18:40:51 -0000 Subject: Pure Blood Fertility (was Malfoys on Weasleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84403 > Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Ron said something in CoS to the effect that if the wizards hadn't married muggles they would've died out? > This would lead to the conclusion that the wizarding world doesn't > have some form of magic fertility treatment, otherwise they would've used it long ago to increase their diminishing numbers. Now you've got me confused. I always thought that the Pure Bloods are dieing out not because of infertility but because of the lack of available partners. And there is a difference between the two. For example, even if the Pure Bloods who are left have 6-12 kids for each family, unless they consent to marrying brother and sister they will still eventually die out. Fertility will help but it doesn't really matter in the long run. Historically European Royalty always had lots of kids and intermarried all over the place but still have reduced their numbers to just a hand full. It still seems odd that the Malfoys have only one child though. Also the Blacks had few children considering the obvious desperate need for Pure Blood lines. One branch having only two the other only three. Did they consider intermarrying their children? Of course the one advantage Lucius Malfoy has in Draco is the fact that his son is now the single heir to two great family fortunes and legacies. The Black's and Malfoy's have united under the Malfoy name. Probably not something he imagined when he married the youngest of three sisters with two male cousins. He is putting all his eggs one basket though, not a strategy that seems to fit Lucius Malfoy character. There definitely has to be more to the Malfoy's lack of children. mandy From mookie1552 at aol.com Sat Nov 8 15:46:12 2003 From: mookie1552 at aol.com (Jennifer) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 15:46:12 -0000 Subject: Was Quirrell a victim? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84404 After reading the first book...again...I started to think about if Quirrell was a victim or a knowledgable co-conspiritor? Did LV take him over because he was going to be the DADA the first year that HP was going to be at Hogwarts and knew that HP could easily be killed or was Quirrell a DE and let his master take over him so he could do the same? It all depends if Quirrell was a DE or some poor guy in the wrong place at the wrong time. Personally I think Quirrell was a death eater and just doing his duty. Quirrell put on the facade of a studdering, bumbling fool for a whole year for the rest of the school to make him the least possible suspect. But who did suspect him? Snape, a past death eater. Snape could have known about Quirrell and his history as a DE, that is why he kept his watch and knew to check the Stone while everyone was after the troll. Was Quirrell ever in Azkaban? I wonder. If Quirrell was a DE, wouldn't have DD known or Snape told him? That is my only monkey wrench... Does anyone have any other theories??? jen From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 19:32:12 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 11:32:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Look At Luna Lovegood (longish) Message-ID: <20031108193212.10222.qmail@web40014.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84405 8Nov03 Leb wrote: ...I was always reminded of the descriptions of unicorns whenever I read the physical description of Ollivander. ...(and) for Luna as well. ...does anybody see any unicornish, unicorny, whatever traits besides me? Paula now: That's what it is, thanks Leb! I remember now a tale that I read as a child about how unicorns could only be tamed by virgins or would only go to a virgin (This was a long time ago, at the time didn't really understand what a virgin was). Even when Hagrid introduces them, he tells the students that the unicorn always prefers girls and comments on their silvery color. It's probably safe to assume that the girls in Harry's class are still virgins. Anyway, this makes the connection of Luna riding side-saddle. Just remembered too that in SS/PS, someone (Sorry, don't have my book here) was witnessed, surely it was LV, drinking the blood of a unicorn in the Forest. Yes, this adds a whole new dimension to the Luna Thread. Any ideas? Sorry, Dan, I'm not into the analytical aspects right now. Still hung up on the plot development and devices. Maybe later. ~Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From pen at pensnest.co.uk Sat Nov 8 22:02:53 2003 From: pen at pensnest.co.uk (Pen Robinson) Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 22:02:53 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4D2F7223-1237-11D8-8529-0030654DED6A@pensnest.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 84406 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "artcase" wrote: > If Molly is the "anti-Aunt Petunia" then why does Aunt Petunia >> represent a stay at home mom as well? And please don't tell me that >> Aunt Petunia isn't guilty of the same vicarious-give-her-all-for- > her- >> children (in this case, Duddykins) Poof that Molly does. > On Friday, Nov 7, 2003, at 15:35 Europe/London, moorequests wrote: > > Art.... there is one major difference between them, and it is a > big one. > > Molly is happy and fufilled in her roll as housemaker, mother, and > queen of the castle, and Aunt Petunia is not. This isn't how I would interpret it. I don't see any reason to suppose that Petunia is unhappy that she is a non-working wife - or, rather, I don't see any reason to suppose that she would be a happy, fulfilled person if she went out and got a job. I think Molly is the anti-Petunia because Molly is loving and giving while Petunia is selfish and unkind. Molly does her best to mother her own children, but has plenty of room in her heart to love Harry as well. Petunia lavishes all her love and attention on Dudley but has nothing to spare for Harry - even though his claims as her nephew are far greater than his claims on Molly. The best way to contrast them is to have them performing the same role in their very different styles. > This is why Molly is an > anti-Petunia... it's the attitude. Molly chose her role. With such a > large family, it is often much more financially wise to have a parent > stay home to care for the children than to have both work and hire > someone to take care of the children. Since childcare providers get > upwards of $10-12 dollars an hour now, it can really take a full > day's wages to pay for childcare. > > I agree that many women, like Petunia, step into roles simply > because they feel they must, that it is expected, and it makes them > miserable. It's hard to tell what the economics of the WW may be - perhaps childcare is easier to organise there if one wants to do so. I can imagine a Wizarding version of the listening-in devices you can use to hear whether your sleeping infant upstairs has woken up... But I agree that Molly chose her role as stay-at-home mother. As for Petunia, I think we can reasonably assume that Vernon makes enough money to be able to afford a non-working wife, but I also see no reason to suppose that Petunia could not go out to work if she wanted to, particularly now that Dudley is off at Smeltings during term time. I think she chooses not to work, though probably with very different motives to Molly! Pen From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 8 21:56:31 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 21:56:31 -0000 Subject: Malfoys on Weasleys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84407 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "silver_owl_01" wrote: > Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Ron said something in CoS to > the effect that if the wizards hadn't married muggles they would've > died out? > Geoff: 'twas indeed our Ron in COS. "'It's a disgusting thing to call someone,' said Ron, wiping his sweaty brow with a shaking ahand. 'Dirty blood, see. Common blood. It's mad. Most wizards these days are half-blood anyway. If we hadn't married Muggles we'd have died out.'" In Hagrid's hut after Ron's wand backfires and he starts to belch slugs. (COS UK edition p.89) From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 8 22:09:08 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 22:09:08 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84408 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > > Annalisa: > > Too true snip And there's just something so funny about Draco. > > I'd like to see him get a kick in the ass > > but at the same time I'm fond of him because he's so well-written > in these scenes. He's very evocative of a lot of the petty boys I > knew in high school. He acts like a rottenlittle teenager, and I just > enjoy reading that. > Geoff: The trouble is that when you meet James in OOTP, he also acts like a rotten little teenager who needs a kick up the backside...... Perhaps we might see a change in Draco. I've always thought he was a real prat, but I've begun to have a little bit of sympathy for him - guy's not had a chance, saddled with a father like Lucius. As the old saying goes, "I can choose my friends....." Mandy: > I concede the Malfoys are good looking. (You are absolutely right > about beautiful Orlando Bloom and his blond, and pale pointy face, > Erin). > Geoff again: I hate to worry you but Orlando Bloom is actually very dark haired..... so he's not a Malfoy. :-) From darkthirty at shaw.ca Sat Nov 8 22:36:09 2003 From: darkthirty at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 22:36:09 -0000 Subject: Further analysis of Luna Lovegood Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84409 To summarize my points so far - Lovegood is not suspicious by nature, nor does she display a penchant for decoding, but rather an obsession with, and unquestioning belief in the validity of, her father's newspaper and anything in it. Lovegood is not particularly a "seer," at least not anymore than Potter is. The same goes for speculations regarding Luna's (and Harry's) non-human origins, her species, as it were. Lovegood gets as much validation of her experiences from Potter as he does from her. This mutual validation is assailable, if sweet. Potter's heroic is from the heart, rather than from the intellect. Lovegood's "spaciness" and apparent equanimity may be more or less faulty mechanisms for dealing with her mother's death 6 years before. The scene at the end of OOP is a breath of fresh air, for the readers, for Potter, and, I submit, for Lovegood. I refer to it as an opening, preparing the stage for the send-off by the Order, but prepared for, by Potter, at the lake, with a sit down without which the interaction with Lovegood could not have taken place. The fact that Luna was not mentioned as being on the train at the end of the school year is significant. Now, for the new stuff. Melanie describes Potter's hurt at learning the fallability, the mistakes, of his father and god-father, a kind of betrayal of his inner fantasy. In a sense, Lovegood supplies a method by which a fallable ideal (her mother) can be clung to - a level of acceptance. But, concommitantly, she finds that, in order to sustain this equanimity, she must remain open to fantastical beliefs, some of which will be, inevitably (since they can't be disproven, entirely) seemingly validated. What Lovegood does get validation of on a more important level, in OOP, is of her competance as a witch. Annemehr states that she assumes that Lovegood has stability and love in her family. We are not told much about her father, though. I'm not sure what her home life would be like. On one hand, the thorough belief in what her father prints might indicate unfulfilled longing for that "acceptance," or on the other a genuine closeness/love/respect/agreement. The telling thing is that she clings to the Quibbler like a security blanket. I agree that there is something "definitely wrong" with all of us. But in terms of the books, I want to deepen the analysis of Lovegood, precisely because she is such a breath of fresh air and precisely because I am so taken with her character. In one way, I feel like there are really only two Real World, as it were, characters in the book - Harry (insofar as he is not Rowling) and Luna. This comes from the questions I asked - why was she introduced, given a chapter, and given the penultimate scene with Potter? Rowling needed her, so I am wondering exactly why? And I am assuming it is because the resolution (the liberation) requires someone from outside the fantasy world of Potter - someone who (in book terms, for the character Harry Potter) serves the same function as the boy in closet (in RW terms) served for Rowling. I don't have much thought about Lovegood ushering in, or being part of ushering in, a period of House unity, but perhaps showing the way to a "houseless" Hogwarts. To Paula, I would add this - Analysis on this level can certainly aid one in decyphering plot development and devices, in much the same way Lovegood's example of equanimity aids Potter. Concluding then - Luna's role as agent for Harry's development needs to be analysized from her perspective as well, if she is to be more than "a plot device" herself. Because of the issues her beliefs, her spaciness, bring up, it is perhaps too easy to "accept" what she is at face value. Almost as if her role as friend to Potter is her entire raison d'etre. A paucity of serious theory regarding Luna the witch, the absence of any anagrammed theory especially, such that she cannot participate in the WitchWizard Wrestling Federation, for example, indicate to me that listees haven't fully let her into the story. The strange lack of interest by most regarding her absence on the train (she was probably with other Ravenclaws, someone even said) is a good example of this. One thought, too, that interests me is that Rowling probably won't leave the Nargles/mistletoe thing just hanging there. I am thinking of these, for example. LLL - L3 League of Luna Lovers LLLL - L4 League of Loony Luna Lovers LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL - L16 Loving Literature, Loving Life; League of Loony Luna Lovers Lifts Luminous Laughing Lass, Leitmotif of Light, to Latitudes of Legend dan (owner and advocate of L 3, 4 and 16, if they ever exist) From nibleswik at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 18:57:07 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 18:57:07 -0000 Subject: Unattractive good guys? was: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84410 > I get the sense that all the > *evil* or *bad* characters are handsome and attractive. Where as the > *good* guys (and girls) are all plain looking and social misfits. > The ones we have met seem to follow this rule anyway. No, no, no, no, no. I definitely disagree. Good guys described as attractive at one point or another (that I remember) are: Sirius Cedric Firenze James (?) Lily Cho (I don't like her, but she is a good guy.) Fleur Parvati and Padma Bill Charlie, Fred, and George (I think) Angelina Johnson (I think) I know I'm forgetting some. Furthermore, the majority of Slytherin house is supposed to be physically repulsive, although this is arguably because of the terrible bias, blah de blah de blah. Wormtail's definitely not good-looking and the description of Bellatrix (deep circles under her eyes, etc.) doesn't sound particularly appealing. Tom Riddle was gorgeous, yes, but Voldemort? Personally, I'm not a huge fan of snake-like red eyes. So, yes. I don't think good = plain and bad = attractive. Cheekyweebisom From nibleswik at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 18:42:50 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 18:42:50 -0000 Subject: Wormtail's silver hand (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84411 Does anyone think that > Wormtail is going to kill Lupin with his silver hand? Why or why not? It's an interesting idea, but don't you think Dumbledore and Lupin have probably already thought of this? I would not be surprised if they had taken some precaution. Another reason it seems improbable to me is that Wormtail would have to come to Lupin; Lupin's not about to go on any missions for the Order on the full moon! It would be dangerous to other Order members in the extreme. Therefore, as I said, Wormtail would have to deliberately set out to kill the werewolf. Voldemort has never expressed particular interest in Lupin, and why should he? I don't think Wormtail's likely to be sent to kill Lupin, so I doubt it'll happen. Also, I really, really, really don't want Wormtail to be the last living Marauder. Really! > A related question regarding Sirius's schoolboy "prank": If Snape were > a vampire, couldn't he have fought werewolf Lupin in that form? If > we're going by folklore, nothing can kill a vampire but a stake of > holly to the heart, right? Why would he have needed to learn > occlumency or any form of defense against the dark arts if he were > virtually immortal? > > Carol Yet another reason I think the Snape vampire theories are complete bollocks. Yay for you! I agree. It would be rather like Tonks devoting her time to studying Concealment and Disguise. OTOH, Lupin's very interested in DADA. Nevertheless, I don't see any basis for thinking Snape's a vampire aside from the obvious, "Well, he has black hair! And is slithery!" Cheekyweebisom From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 19:13:38 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 19:13:38 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84412 Siriusly Snapey Susan: I'm thinking perhaps > it's more of the Dreaded Movie Contamination which puts Draco, at > least, into this category of handsome guys. Do we have descriptions > of him in canon which paint him as attractive? I keep thinking of > the "pale, narrow face" descriptions...which don't sound very > attractive to me... We have the statement at the beginning of GoF that his mother would have been pretty if it weren't for her expression. She's a Black and they're known for their attractiveness. I imagine that if Lucius were physically unattractive she'd have no use for him (but blood and money could well have overcome some of her objections). Carol, who is trying to keep the list elves happy by editing her posts and hopes she hasn't snipped too much! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 19:34:24 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 19:34:24 -0000 Subject: OoP: What was the Point of this Death? And Phineas ??s In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84413 > > And I was also wondering, when did Sirius get another wand? And all > > the DE's that were in Azkaban too? I mean, the just couldn't waltz > in > > to Ollivanders. > > >Luna > > > Marianne (List Elves: This is the way the post was signed) > > (Katie Wible? This was an unsigned post) > Umm, why couldn't Sirius just waltz into Ollivander's? Carol: Since he couldn't apear in diagon Alley in human form without being recognized and arrested, Sirius would have had to "waltz" into Ollivander's in dog form (I don't think you can apparate without a wand) and then transform himself in front of Ollivander, still filthy and penniless--which also raises the question of how he got the gold to buy Harry his Firebolt since the goblins were unlikely to give money to a wanted man--or a cat with a message and a vault key(?). As far as the wand goes, maybe it wasn't his own. He could have found an old one of his mother's in her house. Kreacher wouldn't have been able to hoard it in his den (he gets around rules but can't actually break wizard law). Just some thoughts. And there's the old and ultimately more important question that I don't think has been satisfactorily answered about how Voldemort got HIS wand back. Carol, who has read the FAQ but not 100,000 back posts From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net Sun Nov 9 00:41:53 2003 From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Hebby Elf) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 00:41:53 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Renamed and Slightly Improved Humongous Bigfile Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84414 Greetings from Hexquarters! Just a quick note to let you know that we have (finally) renamed our posting guidelines, as per the results of the recent renaming polls held on the list. "The Humongous Bigfile: Posting Rules You Never Knew You Had to Follow and How to Conform to Them Now That You've Signed Up" can be found at http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin . In addition to changing the name, we've made a few small changes in the guidelines themselves, so we suggest you read them through again, at your convenience. Thanks! Hebby Elf For the List Admin Team From grannybat at hotmail.com Sun Nov 9 00:44:08 2003 From: grannybat at hotmail.com (grannybat84112) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 00:44:08 -0000 Subject: Magic, Medicine, and Medieval Military Memorabilia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84415 It's been an absolutely insane week at work for me, so I've fallen far behind on answering posts. I'll probably never catch up with all the interesting points raised in the meantime--not to mention other fascinating threads (sigh)--but I'll make a stab at it. Caipora played counterpoint: > Grannybat overflowed: > [...] > > Maybe in Britain perfumed baths are more common for young men. > > In my part of the Western U.S., Real Men(tm) don't use bubble bath. > > In your part perhaps, but not F. Scott Fitzgerald's: > > > The story is set in Montana, which may not be your part of the West. It's not, but picking apart all the issues with F. Scott's story would take us way off topic. Suffice to say that Fitzgerald was an East Coast Ivy Leaguer inflicting (for his own purposes) a fantasy castle on the extremely oppositive (is that a word? it is now) geography of The West. But thanks for the link. > > ... wounds caused by magic seem to affect the body far more > > seriously and take much more time to cure, even with access to > > Magical medicine. (How many WEEKS did Hermione need to lose her > > polyjuiced cat form?) > > Note that the magical injury to Dudley's behind was quickly cured > by Muggle medicine. Presumably a wave of a wand could have dealt > with that, though. I was paging thru PS last night and something struck me: Hagrid gives Dudley the pig tail on the night of Harry's birthday, but it takes an entire **month** for the Dursleys to have surgery scheduled. The Hogwarts Express leaves September 1, and Harry asks for a ride to the station the night before. "We're going up to London tomorrow anyway, or I wouldn't bother..." growled Uncle Vernon. "Got to have that ruddy tail removed before he goes to Smeltings." Just a harmless comic moment, or could this time lapse be a clue pointing to something significant? > > Mind-altering potions and spells > > exist, but so far they've been employed only for personal, > > ultimately destructive purposes (Lockhart's memory charms, > > the Imperius Curse, love potions). > > Grannybat has brought up something odd about the magic. Some seems > clearly beneficial such as the elixir vitae and the Mirror of Erised, > but either Rowling or Dumbledore explain to us why they are not as > neat as they appear. Many others are simply counters to other > magic.... But nearly all of the magic described is rather like the > services of the Ankh-Morpork Assasin's Guild: something you > purchase for someone else. I see this as merely the pragatic intersection of a capitalism-based economy and magic. Is there something more specific about this relationship that bothers you? > Grannybat gave a series of examples of maladjusted denizens of the > WW, and a tour of St. Mungo's that highlighted the ways in which it > was more comfortable than but no more medically advanced than > Bedlam, and concluded: > > > The Magical World has no organized way to deal with heartache. > > Grannybat wins this one by a knockout. Certainly she's persuaded me. Oh, thank you! I seem to be making some sense after all. Given the number of characters we've seen who have serious issues with family/emotional/mental baggage--not to mention the psychological scars left on the Magical population as a whole by Vold War I--one would think St. Mungo's would offer more mental health services than it appears to have. Certainly the Department of Mysteries should be involving its research on the human brain in magical medicine. I think it's significant that the door in the Department of Mysteries that leads (we assume) to the study of love is locked with such powerful wards. Why is it that the Magical world fears love so much? > Gryffindor's sword... may be the only sword we're > told about, but there's no shortage of suits of armor. ...The > HP lexicon lists quite a few sets, and even a "long gallery full of > suits of armor." I rushed to look this up in most of the books (I still haven't managed to put my hands on a copy of CoS), and you're right--but in all the references to suits and "coats" of armor, swords are never mentioned. (Neither are maces, lances, or other weapons. Just the armor.) I've seen museum displays of armor with and without weapons, so the lack at Hogwarts isn't necessarily a screaming red light...but it is, I think, suggestive. > They could be hunting trophies, remembrances of Muggles who > attacked wizards. Oh, my! Plausible, if gruesome. I was thinking more along the lines of historical relics; that is, the armor remains as tangible evidence that Muggle men-at-arms once served oaths of fealty to wizards just as they did to Muggle kings and generals in the medieval past. > Armor against magic is bizarre. > Amulets, yes. Charms. Voldemort conjures up a magic shield. But not > armor. Using a spell to conjure whatever defensive barrier or offensive weapon a Magical would need at the moment of attack makes much more sense than maintaining and packing a suit of armor to battle. This discussion reminds me of a scene from Bedknobs and Broomsticks, a Disney movie made in 1971. The Nazis are attacking a small English village on the coast, and the mail-order witch defeats them by animating all the suits of armor in the local museum. I have to wonder if Rowling will offer us a twist on this scene when the Hogwarts castle is attacked. (And it will be, it will be.) > The existence of many sets of conventional armor is either > proof that wizards use conventional weapons, or that they do the > equivalent of collecting scalps. Similiar to Morgana tree in the movie Excalibur? Chilling thought. Certainly the Black family might have done. But would the liberal- minded Albus Dumbledore allow such grim trophies to remain in his halls of learning once he became Head--assuming he knew the history behind them? Maybe this is one of those ugly but exciting bits of history that Professor Binns dulls down when he's droning on and on and on...like the goblin rebellions. > Or that their decorating sense (or Rowling's)is medieval, and they > ape Muggle architecture just as the Hogwarts Express apes a steam- > engine. This would be the simplest explanation, yes. But not nearly as much fun. Grannybat From siriuslove71 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 00:57:56 2003 From: siriuslove71 at yahoo.com (Diana_Sirius_fan) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 00:57:56 -0000 Subject: Wormtail's silver hand (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84416 > A related question regarding Sirius's schoolboy "prank": If Snape were > a vampire, couldn't he have fought werewolf Lupin in that form? If > we're going by folklore, nothing can kill a vampire but a stake of > holly to the heart, right? Why would he have needed to learn > occlumency or any form of defense against the dark arts if he were > virtually immortal? > > Carol Snape may not have had to learn occumlency. If he is a vampire, he may be able to read minds already, so he fine tuned this skill. As far as learning the dark arts: he was always interested in that subject. Just because he could be immortal doesn't mean he can not be interested in a subject. At Hogwarts, all students must take DADA, even if they are a vampire. Even so, JK's vampire might not be a traditional folklore vampire. Diana From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 02:46:38 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 02:46:38 -0000 Subject: Further analysis of Luna Lovegood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84417 dan: > Luna's role as agent for Harry's development needs to be analysized > from her perspective as well, if she is to be more than "a plot > device" herself. Because of the issues her beliefs, her spaciness, > bring up, it is perhaps too easy to "accept" what she is at face > value. Almost as if her role as friend to Potter is her entire raison > d'etre. Annemehr: Point taken! I also hope that Harry actually does think of her as a friend now; I am recalling Harry's discovery in the pensieve in GoF of the fate of Neville's parents, and I was disappointed that it didn't seem to affect his relationship with Neville at the time. Here's hoping that he actually seeks Neville and Luna out on the Hogwarts Express next 1 September! dan: > A paucity of serious theory regarding Luna the witch, the > absence of any anagrammed theory especially, such that she cannot > participate in the WitchWizard Wrestling Federation, for example, > indicate to me that listees haven't fully let her into the story. Annemehr: Either that, or we're just mystified! She is hard to get a handle on, isn't she? I didn't realise I had as much to say about her as I posted until I began typing, but I also think I've gone as far as I can without further input (from JKR, or from listies like yourself). dan: > One thought, too, that interests me is that Rowling probably won't > leave the Nargles/mistletoe thing just hanging there. I was never a shipper, but I'll go H/L if JKR does. Annemehr L3 -- keep it simple, for the badges (but you can use L16 on the letterhead)! From owlery2003 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 03:46:25 2003 From: owlery2003 at yahoo.com (Scott Santangelo) Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 19:46:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lupin's Chocolate, WAS: Lupin's sense of humor (and a bun... In-Reply-To: <3FAB8B02.32525.482B6C5@localhost> Message-ID: <20031109034625.40168.qmail@web60108.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84418 Just a note on this post - I didn't make any part of the following quote(s) attributed to me! Follow the topic if you're curious - not a big deal, but misquoted! Scott Santangelo Shaun Hately wrote: On 6 Nov 2003 at 16:40, Scott Santangelo wrote: > Still, he did have the chocolate. But maybe he's just a chocolate nut > (as many fic authors like to believe) and having it is yet another > happy coincidence. Canon hasn't told us for sure, so I guess we'll > never know. Maybe he just wanted to take the train to get an early > gander at Harry. Being totally sappy - how about the idea that he just *wanted* to ride the train. He's suffered discrimination because he's a werewolf. He's apparently been poor, and maybe had quite a miserable time since he left Hogwarts. Being invited back there, may bring back good memories, and they could include riding the Hogwarts Express... they would for me! Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Sun Nov 9 04:19:36 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 04:19:36 -0000 Subject: Wormtail's silver hand (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84419 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Iggy McSnurd: > > > > Hmmm... Silver hand on a Wizard... Silver vs. Werewolves... > > > > > > Think Wormtail might be assigned to make an assassination attempt on > > Lupin? > > > > > > *hrm* > > Carol: > > > > I notice that no one responded to this post, but I've been wondering the same thing, so I revived it. I realize that Lupin in his human form is apparently immune to silver (and actually strengthened by wolfsbane, which ought to be poisonous to a wolf if not to a werewolf), but the silver hand, which seems to have unusual strength as well as beauty, certainly seems like the ideal weapon to destroy Lupin in his werewolf form. In other words, I think Iggy is on to something. (I do think that Peter will die trying to save Harry, but that won't prevent him from going after Lupin first.) I'd appreciate your responses on this. (I'm assuming that Lupin isn't ESE.)<<< Well, I can't agree with your assumption about Lupin . But I think Wormtail's silver hand will be instrumental against him, and maybe Godric's silver sword as well. -LOTR SPOILER AHEAD: ** ** ** ** ** There's a possible Lord of the Rings reference in Wormtail's name, and Wormtongue did kill the traitor Saruman. I think it very possible that like Wormtongue, Peter was blackmailed as much as lured into serving the Dark Side and that Lupin is the real traitor, the one who was supposed to be Voldemort's second-in-command. Does anybody really believe that's Peter? Of course Wormtongue didn't have a life debt to Frodo the way Wormtail does to Harry. It would be very neat if Wormtail could pay off his life-debt by finishing off ESE!Lupin. Carol: > >>>A related question regarding Sirius's schoolboy "prank": If Snape werea vampire, couldn't he have fought werewolf Lupin in that form? If we're going by folklore, nothing can kill a vampire but a stake of holly to the heart, right? Why would he have needed to learn occlumency or any form of defense against the dark arts if he were virtually immortal?<<< There's no fixed canon of vampire lore, folk or literary. Vampire stories are found all over the world and are extremely various. There are literary and folk vampires who can walk by day and breed with humans. The only thing all the legends have in common is the unnatural thirst, either for blood or life energy. It seems that Potterverse vampires are hard to deal with, since the veela-smitten wizard at the World Cup brags of being a vampire hunter for the Ministry. But they're referred to as non-wizarding part humans in GoF, which makes it sounds as if they're living Beings, not Spirits. Non-wizarding sounds as if they're not supposed to use wands. So Snape might have been expelled from Hogwarts if his true nature were discovered. My theory is he's not pure vampire but another mixed-breed. Pippin From artcase at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 04:55:23 2003 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 04:55:23 -0000 Subject: TIPS - and traps - IN WORKING OUT CLUES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84420 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: ...snip... > So far as I can recall, all discussions, statements or references > re apparating and Hogwarts *in the canon* seem to refer to apparating > into or out of Hogwarts. > No one in the books has actually said that purely internal apparating is > not possible. > > I wait with bated breath for someone to prove me wrong. > > Kneasy Art here: But Dobby obviously came from the Malfoy's during COS, so the above is challenged. Unless of course, Dobby aparated to Hogsmeade, then slipped through the defences (TBD in later books I'm sure) and then, finally, apparated into the Gryffindor common room. All that is a little much if you ask me. From happydogue at aol.com Sun Nov 9 05:21:20 2003 From: happydogue at aol.com (happydogue at aol.com) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 00:21:20 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Speaking up for Petunia Message-ID: <1d4.13fc1456.2cdf28d0@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84421 FYI... In chapter 17 of the chamber of secrets, after Harry has been bitten by the Basilisk, Tom Riddle says to Harry, "You'll be back with your Mudblood mother soon, Harry..." That sentence in itself implies that Lilly was muggle born. JMM From nibleswik at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 19:52:52 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 19:52:52 -0000 Subject: Marauder's houses, was: Re: Sirius Black and Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84422 > But until I have page quotes for the fab four I'm still inclined > to believe they were either all in Slytherin or in separate houses. DEFINITELY not. Definitely. We know James was in Gryffindor. My friend's run off with my books, so I can't give you a quote, but he is in Gryffindor. > Sirius and James behave unlike any of the Gryffindors we've read > about in Harry's Hogwarts and most definitely behave like Draco > and his pals. The criterion for being in Gryffindor is what? Bravery. James, Sirius, and Lupin all seem like textbook Gryffindors to me. So what if James and Sirius aren't nice? Gryffindor isn't the house of the nice. It really irks me when people go, "Oh, he's a snot. Must be a Slytherin." Slytherin is NOT the house of the evil awful meanies; it's for the ambitious and cunning. Furthermore, if the Marauders should be placed in Slytherin because the Marauders/Snape dynamic is similar to the Draco/Harry and Ron one, does that mean Snape belongs in Gryffindor? Of course not. Cheekyweebisom From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 20:26:58 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 20:26:58 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84423 > > I can't think of a good looking person in the entire book > > who hasn't been killed off, or been a bit self envolved > > (ie: Cho, Siris at 15). I wonder if JK Rowling maybe is > > making a suble point about looks. And how other people > > treat them... Snip Mandy again: > I agree. I was just thinking of the Veela in GoF and Mr. > Weasley's comment on don't go for looks alone boys. Something > like that. Certainly JKR is saying a lot on the superficial > exterior vs. internal substance. > > Perhaps all the handsome ones are doomed. In response to both posts: Maybe Narcissa Black Malfoy, whom we've been told would be pretty if not for her sneering expression, is also doomed? Good looks plus the self-love reflected in her first name? Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 21:19:17 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 21:19:17 -0000 Subject: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84424 jjpandy wrote: > > > Plump, warm, nurturing > > > Molly is the opposite of bony, cold, prison-warden Aunt Petunia. I wrote: > > Excellent point (but please don't assume that bony women can't be > > motherly!). It's not just Petunia's treatment of Harry that's > > involved here. Look how she treats her own son. Imagine her sending > > him the muggle equivalent of a howler, if there were such a thing. > > She doesn't discipline Dudley in any way (except for the grapefruit > > diet ordered by the school). Till then she probably sent him > > sweets--as Draco's mother also does. MM wrote: > Petunia may have the best of intentions when it comes to Dudley, > but he really grew up as abused as Harry did. Only he was abused on > the opposite side of the scale. He was overindulged, in almost every > way, in every whim, and that is worse for many children than to grow > up as Harry did- underindulged, forced to fight for survival. That was exactly my point, except that I'm not sure of her intentions. I wasn't defending Petunia, whose overindulgence of Dudley is anything but good mothering. I think you may have been misled by my parenthetical remark reacting as a rather bony woman myself to the implication that plump = nurturing. It was intended as a facetious aside. My apologies for assuming that my intention would be understood by a group of people who don't yet know me. M.M. again: > He grew up a callous bully, who is afraid of his > own shadow, who's never had to really fight for anything, and, if he > was really in danger of death, would die if no one else were around > to rescue him. If that happened, both Vernon and Petunia would have > no idea why; or they'd blame it on Harry, if possible. Never would > they think to question their own indulgent style of parenting which > left the poor boy without a resource. Dudley in the books is a cruel > bully, yet I cannot help pitying him, because he never had a chance. Yes. Again, see my comparison with Draco, another bully whose mother sends him sweets, and who has his own gang of thugs to protect him because, unlike Dudley, he isn't big enough to play the bully role himself (except with his wand). Pampering is not parenting, as we see in both cases. My original intention in responding to the prison-warden post was to extend the contrast between Petunia and Molly from their respective treatment of Harry to Petunia's indulgence of Dudley in contrast with Molly's penchant for discipline. (There may be better disciplinary methods than scolding and howlers, but at least she doesn't tolerate misbehavior.) Dudley's parents, on the other hand, never discipline him for anything. Their blindness to his faults is preparing him for incompetence and delinquency. (I suppose I could pity him, but it would require some effort. Surely he knows what he's getting away with. A fifteen-year-old who beats up ten-year-olds has lost whatever claim he once had to our sympathy.) I do hope we'll see a more sympathetic side of Petunia, whose resentment of Harry may well reflect her being forced by her husband to hide her own family's connection to the WW all these years, but that's a topic for another thread. My point here is just that you seem to have misread my post. We agree that her indulgence of Dudley is not good mothering. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 8 21:39:38 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 21:39:38 -0000 Subject: First name adressing = same House? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84425 I wrote: > > So first names don't indicate being in the same house, but they do > > indicate the speaker's attitude toward the other person--sort of > > like the use of the familiar form of "you" in languages that > > make that distinction. Caipora wrote: > The British use first names less than Americans do. How much less > only a Limey could tell you. > > English does have a second person singular famililar form, and verbs > even conjucate differently for it; it's "thou". > > Rarely used nowadays, of course, but it *is* there. I know. I was actually thinking as I wrote my earlier post of a literary critic's statement that the Green Knight's use of "thou" to King Arthur in "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight" was a deliberate indication of disrespect and equating that act in my own mind with Tom's use of Hagrid's first name--a deliberate attempt put Hagrid in his place that went completely over Hagrid's head (so to speak). "Thou" was still in use in Yorkshire in the 19th century. I don't know what the case is now. (I'm American, as you may have guessed.) I'm also wondering about Snape and Karkaroff in the Yule Ball scene calling each other "Severus" and "Igor," and Harry's(?) remark that he didn't know they were on first name terms. They clearly aren't friends, but I suppose the device is meant to suggest that they're better acquainted than the reader at first expects--and maybe, like so much else, to arouse our suspicions about Snape. (I, for one, think Dumbledore is right in his judgment.) Carol From katrina at lisoneil.fsnet.co.uk Sat Nov 8 22:58:16 2003 From: katrina at lisoneil.fsnet.co.uk (Kat Armstrong) Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 22:58:16 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: More on Molly In-Reply-To: <4D2F7223-1237-11D8-8529-0030654DED6A@pensnest.co.uk> References: <4D2F7223-1237-11D8-8529-0030654DED6A@pensnest.co.uk> Message-ID: <922889188.20031108225816@lisoneil.co.uk> No: HPFGUIDX 84426 Saturday, November 8, 2003, 10:02:53 PM (according to TheBat!), you scribed: Pen: P> As for Petunia, I think we can reasonably assume that Vernon makes P> enough money to be able to afford a non-working wife, but I also see P> no reason to suppose that Petunia could not go out to work if she P> wanted to, particularly now that Dudley is off at Smeltings during P> term time. I think she chooses not to work, though probably with P> very different motives to Molly! I know when I was growing up it was seen very much as a class thing. Someone in Petunia's position would not go out to work because it was not the "done" thing to do. Wives only went out to work if it was a glorified hobby or something "worthy". They certainly wouldn't / couldn't be seen to be working purely for the money. The idea of women having professional careers still hasn't reached certain (thankfully small) sections of British society. Just as an example, when my parents were married (1959) my mother got her redundancy notice from work (at a bank) in the congratulations card for the wedding, and this was considered perfectly normal. -- Kat From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Sat Nov 8 15:49:30 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 09:49:30 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Wormtail's silver hand (longish) References: Message-ID: <000c01c3a669$3ee9ea40$98e779a5@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84427 > Still no takers? Let me ask more simply then. Does anyone think that > Wormtail is going to kill Lupin with his silver hand? Why or why not? Iggy here: Something I pointed out during the earlier discussion about silver and werewolves... Silver is no real harm to werewolves when they are in their human form. It's also only really dangerous to them when used as a weapon. This is similar to the fact that a vampire can handle a wooden stake with no problem, provided that they don't try to plunge it through their own heart. Silver is considered the lunar metal (as gold is considered to be the solar one) and therefore is the only weapon truly effective against lycanthropes. (Well, most of them, anyhow...) It is also considered to be the only metal that is truly pure on a spiritual level, and as lycanthropy is deemed in many folklores as a taint not only of the body, but of the spirit and soul, using purity against corruption is a logical choice. In other words, the argument that Lupin handled, and drank from, the silver goblet proving he isn't harmed by silver is pure poppycock. I can handle a bullet without harm, but if someone shot me with one, it's a different story. > A related question regarding Sirius's schoolboy "prank": If Snape were > a vampire, couldn't he have fought werewolf Lupin in that form? If > we're going by folklore, nothing can kill a vampire but a stake of > holly to the heart, right? Why would he have needed to learn > occlumency or any form of defense against the dark arts if he were > virtually immortal? Iggy here again: I actually did a speech for a class once on the three major methods to kill a traditional vampire. Please note that these techniques of eleimination or detection are valid for only the traditional European vampire. Many other forms of vampire exist that don't meet these conditions. One example is a form of African vampire that's invisible all the time and can only be slain by a shaman or priest wielding a wooden sword or spear.) 1: Binding the spirit to the ground with a stake made of oak, ash, yew, or holly. This not only stakes the body to the ground, but also, because of the type of wood and location of the stake in the body, does the same to the wayward soul of the vampire. This was also accompanied by one or more of the following: a: filling the mouth with consecrated holy wafers and sewing the lips closed with silver wire. b: hamstringing the corpse both at the heel and knees. c: driving an iron spike into the skull. d: searing out the eyes with heated coins of silver. e: decapitating the corpse and placing the head between the knees of the body. f: burying the body at a crossroads. The demonic soul that posesses the body becomes confused as to which way to go when it rises from the ground, and is stuck at the crossroads until morning, when it must return to the ground. 2: Exposing the body to the full light of the sun. Not only is the sun considered to be a purifying agent of life, but in many cultures, it is seen as being a form of the "Light of God" itself. As such, it purifies all evil that it touches. A vampire, being seen as a being of purest evil and darkness, they are virtually disintegrated by the rays of the sun. 3: Submerging the vampire within swiftly moving, fairly clean water. The water, be it a river, waterfall, or swift stream, draws the poisons and impurities from a person's body and washes it away. Since a vampire is seen, by nature, as being impure corrupted, the water washes away the whole of its being. Now, as for detecting if someone's a vampire... Supposedly they are repelled by garlic. Old wive's tale and not to be relied on, IMHO. In the old days, garlic was a cure for everything. Got a cold, use garlic. Suffering the pox, use garlic. Plagued by vampires, use garlic... (I'm pretty sure that the House Elves don't need to take the trouble to set up a separate meal for Snape, and some of the food he eats probably has garlic in it. Not only that, he wouldn't be able to be at the same table as a meal with garlic in it. Add in the fact that, if Quirrel's turban did contain garlic, Snape wouldn't have been able to talk with him up close and personal.) Commonly, they have no reflection in a mirror, especially one with a pure silver backing. Possible, depending on the vampire lore you're dealing with. In many cultures, a mirror is seen as not reflecting a person's body, but their soul. As a vampire is seen as a soulless being, they wouldn't appear in a mirror. (Hmmm... We've never seen Snape's reflection in a mirror other than the Foe Glass, which isn't really described as a mirror. But then again, the only person we've seen in a normal mirror in the books at all is Harry. I don't think the Mirror of Erised counts as a normal mirror. Besides, if Snape was a vampire and couldn't be reflected in a mirror, don't you think Dumbledore would give him access to the Mirror of Erised? After all, Snape would probably see himself in it, even if he were a vampire.) Vampires are often regarded as never casting a shadow, since the shadow was often seen as an evil counterpoint to the self and was absorbed into the vampire's body. (We rarely see anyone casting a shadow in any of the books, so I don't think we can depend on this at all. Besides, if Snape didn't cast a shadow at all, I think someone would have noticed it.) A vampire cannot bear the touch of the sun's rays. (Snape has been seen outside quite often, and with no ill effect. Otherwise, he wouldn't have been able to save Harry from Quirrel's jinx, and he wouldn't have been able to referee the Quidditch match between Gryffindor and Slytherin.) A vampire must be invited in by the master of a house in order to enter a private abode. This was often seen as a factor of the power a person had over the land they owned. As potent as a vampire is when compared to a human, this is seen as a power even they cannot take away from the owner of a house. This is also a symbol of the power the head of a family is seen to possess as well. (If this were the case, Snape wouldn't have been able to enter 12 Grimmauld Place without a direct invitation from Sirius. Dumbledore could reveal the location of the OotP HQ, but even he cannot grant Snape the power to enter. The need for the direct invitation would have given Snape away to Sirius as a vampire, and I'm pretty sure Sirius would have told Harry at some point.) A vampire can no longer consume mortal food and may only subsist on blood alone. Since they are no longer human, and live a wholly parasitic existence, a vampire's body cannot tolerate ingesting normal food. (We have seen Snape at the head table quite frequently, and as much of an issue was made about Moody drinking from the flask and examining his food so closely, I' feel confident in saying that if Snape had a "dietary restriction" that severe, we would have been informed about it in some way.) There's a lot more I can pull up here, but I think I've covered the most salient points. Iggy McSnurd From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 03:04:32 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 03:04:32 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black, Sorting Hat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84428 Susan again: > > But I don't believe the sorting hat necessarily puts family members > > all in the same house. I believe it evaluates each *individual* in > > determining where to place him or her. Yes, all the Weasleys ended > > up in Gryffindor, and probably most of the Blacks in Slytherin. > > But I still think the hat is "smart" enough to know when a member of > > a family comes along who's *different*.... Geoff: > I seem to recall from canon (but can't put my finger on it at 00:42 > hours GMT) that the Patil sisters are in different houses....... Yes. Even though they're identical twins, Parvati is in Gryffindor but Padma is in Ravenclaw, as we find out in GoF. Parvati has to ask Padma if she'll go with Ron to the Yule Ball because Ron and Padma are practically strangers. (That seems to back up the idea someone expressed here recently that the Gryffindors and Ravenclaws have no classes together. I wonder why not.) Re the sorting hat being "smart," one of its songs (I think in PS/SS) says "I've never yet been wrong," but I'm not so sure about the (apparent) placement of Peter Pettigrew in Gryffindor. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 03:35:44 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 03:35:44 -0000 Subject: Speaking up for Petunia, half-blood, squibs In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84429 Jennifer wrote: > what I could see had happened is that Petunia is a > > squib. Petunia hates her sister and hates magic why? > > Because she was denied it, she could never be like her sister > > and never would have the ablities of her sister. Yolanda: > Didn't Snape call Lily a "mudblood" and hasn't JKR herself referred > to Harry as a "half-blood"? In other words one parent was a > wizard/witch and the other was a muggle (or in this case muggleborn). > > Lily was a witch, not a muggle, I would think that would make Harry a > full-blooded wizard, but apparently in the purity conscious WW having > a muggleborn parent still makes you a "half-blood". > > Lily was a muggleborn witch which would make her parents muggles. > Since squibs are only born in magical families, Petunia doesn't > qualify as a squib. Dumbledore himself refers to Harry as a "half blood," in contrast to Neville, who is a "pure blood" (end of OoP when he's explaining the prophecy). He thinks it's significant that Voldemort went after the child whose parentage resembled his own. I have some theories about the intermarriage of muggles and squibs passing as muggles a few generations back in Lily's family in relation to Mark Evans (who has to be somehow related to Harry, but so distantly that Dumbledore can refer to Petunia as Harry's "only living relative"). I think that Lily and Petunia's father may have had a wizard grandfather or great grandfather (the magic has to be in the male line because of the last name) and that this same person is an ancestor of Mark Evans. (Yes, I know I'm just speculating.) But as for Petunia herself being a squib, clearly not. Carol From nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 04:35:53 2003 From: nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com (nkittyhawk97) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 04:35:53 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black and Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84430 ghinghapuss wrote: > Sirius and James behave unlike any of the Gryffindors we've read > about in Harry's Hogwarts and most definitely behave like Draco > and his pals. I can see Sirius in Slytherin... maybe. He showed ambition and cunning when he wormed his way out of Azkaban... but James? Heck no. Being the father of a Gryffindor, it makes no sense. Now, as Dumbledore said in CoS, it's our choices that determine who we are. Harry, despite Voldemort's qualities inside him, chose a different path. Don't you think Sirius's rebelling against his Slytherin family would have put him in a different house due to his *choice*? As for their behavior, the only proof we have of that is Snape's Worst Memory. But honestly, their behavior there reminds me of how Harry treated Dudley in the first chapter of OotP. It's pure adolescense, and as Remus said, they grew out of it. Sure, they're both purebloods but aren't the Weasleys also? I always thought that it was the attitude towards muggleborns that put students in Slytherin. I don't get that from any of the Marauders. However, Peter's cunning and lack of bravery is an entirely different post. *wink* But never James or Remus. Personally, I see remus as a Ravenclaw, but I have no proof, so I'll shut up about it. ;) "nkittyhawk97" From nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 04:52:17 2003 From: nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com (nkittyhawk97) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 04:52:17 -0000 Subject: Wormtail's silver hand (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84431 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Diana_Sirius_fan" wrote: >> Snape may not have had to learn occumlency. If he is a vampire, he > may be able to read minds already, so he fine tuned this skill. nkittyhawk: I'm sorry, I couldn't help but say that occlumency is not reading minds. It's blocking Legilimency, which is reading minds. Now it's interesting that he knows both. Occlumency is obvious - he can't have Death Eaters knowing he's not exactly as ESE as they are. But why would he learn Legilimency? I don't think he had mind-reading qualities simply because he was a vampire. Maybe I was just deprived of scary stories as a child, but I've never heard of a vampire that could read minds. From catlady at wicca.net Sun Nov 9 09:02:38 2003 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 09:02:38 -0000 Subject: replies to: two weeks of main list posts; search for YOUR hand or topic Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84432 Caipora wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/83839 : << We don't see much - or any - abstraction in any Hogwarts class. The kids memorize spells, but no one ever says, "Today we're going to look at the principle of similarity and see how it's used in several basic spells." >> I'm sure that the students are studying Theory (they even have a textbook MAGICAL THEORY by Adalbert Waffling in PS/SS) and many of those essays (so many feet of parchment) that they are assigned to write as homework are about how a theoretical principle is used in several basic spells. I'm sure that somewhere McGonagall gives the assignment specifically to write about how Switching Spells must be modified to Transfigure an animate object into an animate object rather than between animate and inanimate. Lola Laura strike-the-pose wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/83845 : <> Like some others who have replied, I don't think that the Minister of Magic is a member of the Prime Minister's cabinet. Is there ANY evidence that he is, other than the "Minister for X" pattern of the titles of some cabinet ministers? Ray Heuer wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/83888 : << I'm assuming that the WW recognizes the person and power of the Sovereign (ancient instutions tend to respect each other, however grudgingly), >> I think they consider a Muggle sovereign to be not sovereign over magical people. I think in ancient times, Muggle sovereigns had wizarding advisors and champions to politick and fight for them, thus forcing wizarding folk to recognize the Muggle sovereign against their will. But sovereigns gave up employing wizards even before the Decree of Wizarding Secrecy. btw, a friendly wave to the Lion Goddess of http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/83960 << there must be a representative legislature of the WW, perhaps the Wizengamot or something like it. >> Yes, when I invented the Witchingamot (only a detail of spelling away from a correct Book 6 prediction!), it was their legislature, not their Supreme Court. Paula "Griff" wrote: << Remember that Phineus is already dead, so wouldn't he have known if Sirius had died? >> I believe that the painting of Phineas is a separate person from the real Phineas who is dead. It may have been a complete copy of his personality when it was created, but the painting and the person developed on their separate paths since then. Kirstini wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/83963 : << I know all the evidence for Hogwarts being in Scotland, and firmly believe with all the rational parts of my brain that it is, but as a Scot I have two huge problems with the Hogwarts location. 1.) Hogsmeade. This isn't a Scottish name. (snip) 2.) If it's in Scotland, the Giant Squid doesn't live in a lake, it lives in a loch. (snip) I have my doubts that "Hog" is an authentic-enough Scottish word for location anywhere in the country.>> IMHO Hogwarts is IN Scotland but was founded and its surroundings named by four non-Scots. According to me, Godric Gryffindor was Welsh (despite his Saxon and Norman names), Rowena was Saxon, Helga was from the Danelaw, and Salazar was left over from the Roman Empire (why couldn't he have been 600 years old? Flamel was). Thus the non-Scots names. Also, thus why I think Barb's fanfic was erroneous in giving Scots accents to the residents of Hogsmeade. btw friendly wave to Geoff in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/83994 JKR said in an interview that someone reminded her that "hogwarts" had been the name of a kind of lily at Kew, but my Websearching found only references to an herb eaten by hogs, and no picture of it. Does that herb grow in Scotland? Elfundeb wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84010 : << would infinitely prefer Molly's smothering to the Dursleys' neglect >> I think it is stated somewhere in canon that Harry much prefers the Dursleys neglecting him to them harassing him. Bobby Jones wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84033 : << So the Penseive may come up in Book6 or 7. Harry may stumble onto more knowledge of the past if he ends up in Snape's office when Snape is on a mission. >> I would LOVE if Harry found the Pensieve in Snape's office and reminded himself how much *he* hated having someone go through *his* memories. From constancevigilance at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 10:57:39 2003 From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 10:57:39 -0000 Subject: FILK: Peter's Silver Hand Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84433 This one is to Maxwell's Silver Hammer <> Do you really need a midi? Well, here it is: http://www.storth22.freeserve.co.uk/music.htm Peter's Silver Hand James was tragical studied animagical science in the dorm Late night all alone with his best friend Black, oh oh oh Peter Pettigrew one night bid his bed adieu Stumbles on the pair Teach me how to change to a different form, oh oh oh Little did the three of them know in twenty years or so Bang bang Peter's silver hand will come down on someone's head Bang bang Peter's silver hand will make sure someone's dead Back in school again James would play the fool again, Lily gets annoyed Wishing to avoid an unpleasant scene, oh oh oh She tells James OK, he can date her straight away And before too long Singing cupid's song, there's a wedding planned, oh oh oh Peter gets Fidelius charm, which is a big mistake Bang bang Peter's sneaky manner exposed their safety stead Bang bang Peter's snakey master made sure both were dead In the Shrieking Shack, Marauders get their vengeance back, Peter stands alone Pleading for his wretched life to be spared, oh oh oh Harry stops the fatal blow, saves the ratfink Peter so Peter gets away Coming back to make a rebirthing brew, oh oh oh Now the Dark Lord's solid again and a year or two from now Bang bang Peter's silver hand will come down on someone's head Bang bang Peter's silver hand will make sure someone's dead. Silver handed man, silver handed man Constance Vigilance From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 12:19:56 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 04:19:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: replies to: two weeks of main list posts; search for YOUR hand or topic Message-ID: <20031109121956.44703.qmail@web40007.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84434 9Nov04 "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: Paula "Griff! " Gaon wrote: << Remember that Phineus is already dead, so wouldn't he have known if Sirius had died? >> Catlady replied: I believe that the painting of Phineas is a separate person from the real Phineas who is dead. It may have been a complete copy of his personality when it was created, but the painting and the person developed on their separate paths since then. Paula again now: Humm..., thanks for reminding me of this topic. However I don't agree that a paintings of Phineus, or any of the wizards for that matter, are separate from the real Phineus who is dead. When Harry dreamed of Arthur Weasley's injury, The potraits on the wall were listening to all the goings-on, and 2 were sent by Dumbledore to investigate. Now these people are dead, but clearly still have an interest in the world of the living. Obviously the dead must retain some of their "living personality" or why else would DD have known to choose these 2. For further proof, when Phineus spoke to Harry at Grimmauld Place, he made a remark how much he disliked teaching--ie still retaining a preference from the time he was alive. OK, so what's the proof that the Dead in Portraits (now living in the world beyond) are indeed on the same path as their portraits? I go back to Nearly Headless Nick's conversation with Harry at the end of OP. He tells Harry that only those who are afraid of death remain in tis world as ghosts. Notice that he doesn't mention portraits (They're obviously not ghosts) but neither does he negate the possiblity of the Dead, in the form of portraits, taking an active part in the world of the living. To sum it all up, the way I see it: If the portraits were only of this world, they'd be ghosts and if they were only of the Beyond, they would have no interests, understanding, or willingness to participate in the events of this world. So, to me, this simply says that the portrait and person in this world or the other are one and the same. ~Paula "Griff" Gaon Thanks to everyone who's voted in the "Which Is Your Favorite Creature" poll. If you haven't voted yet, please do at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/surveys?id=1151101 --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sylviablundell at aol.com Sun Nov 9 13:03:00 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 13:03:00 -0000 Subject: First name addressing = same house Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84435 The use of "thou", though dying out in Yorkshire, is still found among older people. It is pronounced "tha" eg. "Tha knows its time for bed". There doesnt seem to be any social connotation. People who still say "thou" use it to anyone they are speaking to, family, friends, children, borough surveyors, the Queen, anyone. Shame its dying out. Sylvia From kewiromeo at aol.com Sun Nov 9 14:03:12 2003 From: kewiromeo at aol.com (kewiromeo at aol.com) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 09:03:12 EST Subject: Book 1 question Message-ID: <1a6.1c8049db.2cdfa320@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84436 I am taking a Litterature for children class and the teacher has us read SS. Now, as we have all read the book a million times I feel we are the experts. My teacher tells us, "I only read the book for this class, and I only read the first book." Would you want your children having a teacher like this? a) Whether you like it or not, you read all 5 books and b) you are supposed to like the books, but no one is forcing them down your throat. She says shes trying to get a few children books published, but if she thinks she knows anything then I'd suggest reading the books. I think it is disgraceful of her to act so nonchalantly about this. Now here is my question, and I think a direct response to me would reach me better, but this is what I wanted to know. At what point does Harry enter the magical wold? My teacher (the expert) seems to think that it was when he steps onto the platform 9 3/4. I wrote a 23 page paper on this book for my Comp 2 class and I wrote that Harry's crossing of the threshold was the opening of the door in Diagon Alley. A stupid sorority girl yelled at me when I suggested this and said, "I read all the books, and I know what I'm talking about." Maybe there are some people that shouldn't read the book. Tzvi of Brooklyn [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Sun Nov 9 15:56:20 2003 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 15:56:20 -0000 Subject: Book 1 question In-Reply-To: <1a6.1c8049db.2cdfa320@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84437 --- kewiromeo wrote: > I am taking a Litterature for children class and the teacher has us read SS. > Now, as we have all read the book a million times I feel we are the experts. > My teacher tells us, "I only read the book for this class, and I only read the > first book." Would you want your children having a teacher like this? a) > Whether you like it or not, you read all 5 books and b) you are supposed to like > the books, but no one is forcing them down your throat. She says shes trying to > get a few children books published, but if she thinks she knows anything then > I'd suggest reading the books. I think it is disgraceful of her to act so > nonchalantly about this. > > Now here is my question, and I think a direct response to me would reach me > better, but this is what I wanted to know. At what point does Harry enter the > magical wold? My teacher (the expert) seems to think that it was when he steps > onto the platform 9 3/4. I wrote a 23 page paper on this book for my Comp 2 > class and I wrote that Harry's crossing of the threshold was the opening of the > door in Diagon Alley. A stupid sorority girl yelled at me when I suggested > this and said, "I read all the books, and I know what I'm talking about." Maybe > there are some people that shouldn't read the book. > > Tzvi of Brooklyn The question should be, re-introduced to the WW. He was raised by wizard and witch till he was about 14 months old. We now know that Mrs Figg was from a wizarding family, so apart from his "...making things happen when he was scared or angry", the magical world was never far away. Harry's personal conscious experience with magic by his own hand was buying his wand. He witnessed WW activities as the letters arrived. But his first best personal experience, was mounting his broomstick. He felt most comfortable then. Go easy on your teacher. PS/SS was recommended to her as another example of a successful children's writing style. That is what appeals to her, not the Hagrids and Hermiones that we yearn to encounter as we pick up the next in the series. Even if she read all 5 books several times over, she would never get close to your depth of understanding of HP. ~aussie~ From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Nov 9 16:02:15 2003 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 9 Nov 2003 16:02:15 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1068393735.23.59769.m11@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84438 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, November 9, 2003 Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CST (GMT-06:00) Hi everyone! Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. *Chat times are not changing for Daylight Saving/Summer Time.* Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. Go into any Yahoo chat room and type /join HP:1 For further info, see the Humongous BigFile, section 3.3. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/hbfile.html#33 Hope to see you there! From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 18:14:28 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 10:14:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Further analysis of Luna Lovegood Message-ID: <20031109181428.39947.qmail@web40018.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84439 9Nov03 Dan wrote: Potter's heroic is from the heart, rather than from the intellect. Paula: We could argue this point ad infinium. I'll settle to say that HP's heroic is an intellectual decision, a reaction to the fact that he has been all his life the victim, orphaned and bullied. But once a decision like this is made, it becomes internalized in the heart. Dan: To Paula, I would add this - Analysis on this level can certainly aid one in decyphering plot development and devices, in much the same way Lovegood's example of equanimity aids Potter. Paula: Touche! This analysis is a lot more concrete--the what, where, when why. I sensed from the very beginning of the Luna chapter that she'd be a crucial plot element, so for me it was always a foregone conclusion. Luna's chapter even begins with the suspense of the Griffyndors searching for a compartment and the tension that Neville feels about sitting with her. Dan Concluding then - Luna's role as agent for Harry's development needs to be analysized from her perspective as well, if she is to be more than "a plot device" herself. Paula: OK, but how far can we go analysizing Luna's role as such. We're given only tone and moods as hints. We more or less know HP's character. I have a gut feeling that Luna is acting at this point as a pivot in Harry's emotional development and maturity as she patiently and blandly explains what she's doing in the last scene. We still don't know Luna very well, so for now we can only theorize--read between the lines. For example I already see a strength of character and confidence from her attitude towards finding her things. But, I still see this incident as a possible opening to further plot development. So, maybe we're thinking along the same lines here. Dan: Because of the issues her beliefs, her spaciness, bring up, it is perhaps too easy to "accept" what she is at face value. Almost as if her role as friend to Potter is her entire raison d'etre. Paula: Not at all! The issues of her beliefs and spaciness have left me on the edge of the chair. When JKR starts like this, we should know by now that there'll be plenty to follow. I especially feel this way because of the conspicuousnss of her absence on the train home. My personal theory, and have probably said this before, is that there is a real significance to WHAT Luna's looking for and why these particular things were hidden. What's your theory, Dan? Finally, I vote L3--keep it simple, make it fun. Whatever Potter and Luna, Dan, you're a good catalyst. ~Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From princessmelabela at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 18:31:12 2003 From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 10:31:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius Black In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE9824@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: <20031109183112.27049.qmail@web20708.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84440 Tonya wrote: Are we in agreement that Sirius Black was in Slytherin house?? Tonya (this just dawned on me yesterday while listening to OOP, ok so I am a little slow on the up take........Sorry) My reply: Lord I hope we are not in agreement about this. I for one believe wholley that Sirius Black is a Gryffindor. There is far too much evidence to contradict this. Yes, his family I believe are fully Slytherin but that is ever more reason for me to assume that he can't be a Slytherin. I believe that Sirius was ostracized from his family for many reasons. But one of the clearest is that he was not sorted into Slytherin. This would have started a downhill cycle for him. As he started to pull away from his family more and more. Another clear reason I feel that this cannot be is that I believe that he is a member of the same house as the other four is that how on Earth would they all dissappear during the full moon and not have their housemates notice. And if they were all in Slytherin why is it that Snape did not become suspicious before the "prank"? It just seems a bit odd to me. I don't think there is any agreement about the status of Sirius. And their won't be until we hear it directly from JKR herself. ~Melanie We shall never forget Sirius Black....long live his memory! Come visit my LJ http://www.livejournal.com/users/princessmela2 Click to subscribe to Sirius_Black --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From princessmelabela at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 18:41:30 2003 From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 10:41:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Rowling's politics (Was I know Molly.....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031109184130.80109.qmail@web20705.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84441 I think her left-wing political views are pretty transparent via Hermione, whom I liked better when she wasn't so self-righteously defending the rights of house elves. (I'm not attacking her views, just wishing she had left them out of the book.) Her dislike of government interference in education is also apparent throughout OoP. Fortunately she made Umbridge into a character you love to hate. But I do feel at times that she (Rowling) is as preachy as Percy at times--and utterly in favor of rule breaking. I hope the last two books are less overtly political and concentrate more on the characters and the essential elements of the story. No more spew, please. (Sorry, Hermione. I know it's S.P.E.W., but I'm with Ron on this.) Carol, who's afraid she's in for it now My reply; First off may I say that I consider myself a fairly right winged conservative person. I believe in conservative views. I'm staunchly against abortion, I think affirmative action is way beyond it's time, I believe that most of civil welfare law are just holding people back and not allowing them to establish what they are truly capable of. On the other hand, I personally love Hermione and her campaign against SPEW. I personally believe without a doubt that no person should be held under anyone else's power on the basis of who they are. That is what they are doing to the house elves, which are clearly a homage to slavery. One of the things that I find the most poingnant is Hermione believes in education, and I personally agree as well, education is the key to starting social reform. Maybe I'm a little crazy and alone here but I still maintain that these issues are ones that are appropriate for the books and I see no problem with them being in the books. Or perhaps, I'm not as conservative as I think I am. We shall never forget Sirius Black....long live his memory! Come visit my LJ http://www.livejournal.com/users/princessmela2 Click to subscribe to Sirius_Black --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From princessmelabela at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 18:51:53 2003 From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 10:51:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Book 1 question In-Reply-To: <1a6.1c8049db.2cdfa320@aol.com> Message-ID: <20031109185153.32085.qmail@web20704.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84442 Now here is my question, and I think a direct response to me would reach me better, but this is what I wanted to know. At what point does Harry enter the magical wold? My teacher (the expert) seems to think that it was when he steps onto the platform 9 3/4. I wrote a 23 page paper on this book for my Comp 2 class and I wrote that Harry's crossing of the threshold was the opening of the door in Diagon Alley. A stupid sorority girl yelled at me when I suggested this and said, "I read all the books, and I know what I'm talking about." Maybe there are some people that shouldn't read the book. Tzvi of Brooklyn My reply: Tzvi I'm really sorry and I don't mean to be rude. But I am a member of Chi Omega and the fact that this girl is in a sorority is really not important to the statment. I'm sorry I just get really hurt when I have people tell me I'm stupid because I pledged my freshman year. It's really hurtful. But in answer to your question, the truth is no one not a teacher, not a sorority girl, not a fantasy expert is going to agree on any point in the Harry Potter books. Things that seem so obvious to some people are debated in others. Case in point, I personally thought it was really obvious that Luna had a crush on Ron, so obvious in fact I took it as a fact. Of course, after reading the books and coming on here I found out that many people did not in fact see it this way at all. That was very mind boggling too me. But truth be told, I hate anyone that claims to have the answers to any question. I especially hate people who try to say they understand something when clearly they haven't even tried to understand it. To add something to this argument about when Harry first entered the magical world. I personally believe that he never left. He was still preforming accidental magic, still a magical child, and he still knew that he was different. So just because you are not actively a member of a certain society does not mean that it is not still a part of you. Perhaps, I'm reading into this far too much. ~Melanie P.S. Is anyone online and wanting to come to the chat? We shall never forget Sirius Black....long live his memory! Come visit my LJ http://www.livejournal.com/users/princessmela2 Click to subscribe to Sirius_Black --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From princessmelabela at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 19:03:48 2003 From: princessmelabela at yahoo.com (Melanie Black) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 11:03:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius Black, Sorting Hat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031109190348.72557.qmail@web20712.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84443 Carol wrote: Yes. Even though they're identical twins, Parvati is in Gryffindor but Padma is in Ravenclaw, as we find out in GoF. Parvati has to ask Padma if she'll go with Ron to the Yule Ball because Ron and Padma are practically strangers. (That seems to back up the idea someone expressed here recently that the Gryffindors and Ravenclaws have no classes together. I wonder why not.) My reply: The Gryffindor and Ravenclaws in Harry's year must not have classes together however, the Ravenclaws and Gryffindors in Ginny's year obviously do. This is how Ginny and Luna know eachother so well and how they appear to be in class together at least during the time of the last talk in the fire. We shall never forget Sirius Black....long live his memory! Come visit my LJ http://www.livejournal.com/users/princessmela2 Click to subscribe to Sirius_Black --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From constancevigilance at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 19:11:56 2003 From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 19:11:56 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84444 Carol wrote: > Lupin was made a Gryffindor prefect to keep an eye on his friends, Clarification, please: It says Lupin was made a prefect to keep an eye on his friends. Does it confirm anywhere that he was a *Gryffindor* prefect? I think he could still carry some weight with his pals even if he were a prefect from another house. I'm still betting on Lupin in Ravenclaw. Constance Vigilance From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk Sun Nov 9 19:47:30 2003 From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 19:47:30 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Who Said That? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84445 Greetings from Hexquarters! There have been a number of posts recently in which the attribution of quotes has been either lacking or confusing. Please would you make sure that you attribute clearly? It is a matter of basic courtesy to the previous poster to acknowledge them and (given Yahoo!'s imperfect threading function) it helps anyone who might want to go back to find the quoted post to know who wrote it. Similarly, please don't just launch into a post with "That's a great idea" or "I agree", without letting us know whom you're agreeing with and (briefly!)what the idea is. Please attribute *clearly* and *accurately* and don't just rely on automatic nested attribution: ........................ --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com "Harry" wrote --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dick" wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tom" wrote:In >>>Phoenix tears....I forgot >>> >> >>Lucky for Harry that Voldemort always seems to have such memory lapses >Luck? What's luck got to do with anything? > >Harry ........................................ is not particularly clear, whereas .............................. Tom: >>>Phoenix tears....I forgot Dick: >>Lucky for Harry that Voldemort always seems to have such memory lapses Harry: >Luck? What's luck got to do with anything? ............................... leaves no room for error. Please attribute quotes *at the top*. Do not just leave a signature at the bottom, which may later (on quoting) look like the attribution of *your* comments. On a related issue, if you are referencing a theory or idea which you know you have heard previously in this group, would you please also acknowledge that fact? It is not uncommon for a number of people to come up with the same theory independently, but if you *know* your idea is not original and you know who *did* come up with it, please mention them as a courtesy or (if you can't remember who) at least indicate that you have *read* the theory. Many thanks The HPfGU Admin Team. From zanelupin at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 20:22:28 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 20:22:28 -0000 Subject: Marauder's houses, was: Re: Sirius Black and Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84446 Cheekyweebisom: >DEFINITELY not. Definitely. We know James was in Gryffindor. My friend's run off with my books, so I can't give you a quote, but he is in Gryffindor.< As far as I can recall, there are two references folks use to place James in Gryffindor. And I'm too darn lazy and tired to go look them up for exact quotes, but: 1. Someone asked JKR what position James played on the Gryffindor Quidditch team. She replied that he was a chaser. This implied he was in Gryffindor because she didn't refute the assertion that he was in that house. However, she didn't actually say he was. 2. In OoP, Harry looks at Ron and it reminds him of another messy haired Gryffindor who once sat under the same tree, or something to that effect. This also implies James is a Gryffindor since Harry's thinking of James, but did Harry just assume his father was in Gryffindor? There's no way of telling from school uniforms as they're written into canon to which house a student belongs. For all we know, Harry is assuming, as many of us do, his father would be a Gryffindor. Both instances can be cited as evidence for a James in Gryffindor scenario, but neither are definitive. People can argue to what degree these two examples prove James' affiliation with Gryffindor, but no one can say we *know* what house he was in. KathyK From lunatique0619 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 14:35:48 2003 From: lunatique0619 at yahoo.com (lunatique0619) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 14:35:48 -0000 Subject: Pure Blood Fertility / The 3 Black Sisters' Ages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84447 Hello, first time poster here. ghinghapuss wrote: > > I always thought that the Pure Bloods are dieing out not because of > infertility but because of the lack of available partners. > Fertility will help but it doesn't really matter in the long run. > It still seems odd that the Malfoys have only one child though. I think "available partners" depends on how far one takes marriages between related persons. I understand that marriage between cousins, for instance, has a long history in many parts of the world. (As in Wuthering Heights, I suppose.) For pureblood wizards, the advantage of intermarriage would be twofold. First, they don't have that much of a choice anyway if they want to stay "pure." Second, homogenous marriages keep the family's fortune and prestige *within* the family. That seems to have been traditionally a huge incentive for cousin marriages. Interesting thing is, prolonged for dozens of generations, this can lead to fertility problems as well. A high rate of inbreeding among animals has been observed to lead to a higher rates of infant mortality, reduced body size, less resistance to infection, and reduced fertility, among other effects. So the Malfoys' being able to produce only one heir might not be so mystifying, after all. It's possible that they were unable to conceive, or did conceive and experienced miscarriage or death of one or more child. (An explanation for Draco's extremely pampered upbringing?) Of course, this leads to the inevitable question of the Weasleys having children galore. My theory is that the Malfoys are far more homogenous of blood than the Weasleys--as in, they "kept it inside the family" more by breeding in a much more select gene pool. While both families are considered pureblooded, I think it's likely the Weasleys married a wider range of families, resulting in better fertility. ghinghapuss wrote: > Of course the one advantage Lucius Malfoy has in Draco is the fact > that his son is now the single heir to two great family fortunes and > legacies. My "keeping it in the family" theory ties in with this. ghinghapuss wrote: >The Black's and Malfoy's have united under the Malfoy > name. Probably not something he imagined when he married the > youngest of three sisters with two male cousins. Actually I believe Narcissa was the eldest of the three sisters, rather than the youngest. We know Andromeda was the middle sister(the charred spot where her name used to be is between Bellatrix and Narcissa), and that Bellatrix is two years older than Sirius. (Reasoning: Sirius said he hadn't seen Bellatrix since he was Harry's own age, fifteen. Since there's little chance of not seeing her when they went to school together, I took this to mean she graduated after Sirius' fifth year, which places her in seventh year when Sirius was in his fifth.) So, taking information from the chat where Rowling revealed Snape's age to be 35/36(presumably GoF time), Sirius is 36/37 during OoP, while Bellatrix is 38/39. Another factor in figuring the respective ages of the sisters is their offspring. While it's true that Andromeda's daughter is older than Narcissa's son, that's possibly due to Narcissa's difficulties with fertility. *points to first half of the post* Andromeda, who married a Muggle-born much to her family's disgust, wouldn't have the homogenous gene problem Narcissa could have had. Poetic justice, don't you think? So anyway, I'd place Tonks at about twenty. McGonagall said being an Auror required three more years of study after graduation, so that seems about right. How old would Andromeda have been when her daughter was born? We know Harry was born when his parents were 21/22, so let's take that for now as the wizarding norm. (Only because there are no other clues..) That would make Andromeda 41/42--older than Bellatrix. With Andromeda as the middle sister, that automatically makes Narcissa the oldest. This might also make Narcissa older than her husband...but that's not exactly unheard of, is it? So yeah, having Narcissa as the eldest daughter makes her more attractive as Lucius Malfoy's choice of wife. I mean, it might have been even better if she had no male relatives in her generation, but hey, he could do worse. If one goes with the reduced fertility theory, there probably weren't that many witches of lofty enough birth to suit him anyway. Heck of an overanalysis for a first post.. -Lunatique From two4menone4you88 at aol.com Sun Nov 9 20:24:47 2003 From: two4menone4you88 at aol.com (two4menone4you88 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 15:24:47 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <62.372657df.2cdffc8f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84448 I can't figure out how to join the chat. thanks for helping! *yaira* [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From catlady at wicca.net Mon Nov 10 00:07:01 2003 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 00:07:01 -0000 Subject: Portrait-Person / re: the Black Sisters Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84449 Paul "Griff" wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84434 : << To sum it all up, the way I see it: If the portraits were only of this world, they'd be ghosts and if they were only of the Beyond, they would have no interests, understanding, or willingness to participate in the events of this world. So, to me, this simply says that the portrait and person in this world or the other are one and the same. >> In my opinion, the magical portrait is a NEW PERSON who began as a copy of the model, with the personality traits and personal memories you mentioned, but after that the portrait has its own life experiences, no longer linked to the life experiences of the model. Apparently several magical portraits of the same model are the same portrait-person, moving from frame to frame. (That's why Dumbledore chose the two he did to check on Arthur's wound, because they had other portraits in appropriate places.) I suppose that the spell for a later portrait is somewhat different than the spell for a first portrait, and the painter knows that it must be used because the spell for a first portrait isn't working. I suppose that the creation of a later portrait updates the model's- memories of the portrait-person without wiping out the memories accumulated by the portrait-person... But I firmly believe there is no telepathic link between the portrait-person and model-person after the painting is completed. Can I make an analogy of a xerox of a laser-printed document? The two copies start out the same but go on to separate lives. Lunatique wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84447 : << Bellatrix is two years older than Sirius. (Reasoning: Sirius said he hadn't seen Bellatrix since he was Harry's own age, fifteen. Since there's little chance of not seeing her when they went to school together, I took this to mean she graduated after Sirius' fifth year, which places her in seventh year when Sirius was in his fifth.) >> I hope Sirius *meant* he hadn't *spoken* with her, because I very much want Bellatrix and everyone else in Severus's little friendship group of Slytherin schoolmates to be the same age as Severus and Sirius. << So anyway, I'd place Tonks at about twenty. McGonagall said being an Auror required three more years of study after graduation, so that seems about right. >> IIRC other posters have placed Tonks at 22 or 23 ... McGonagall told Harry that no one had been taken on as an Auror for four years, which would fit with Tonks having been taken on, had three years of training, and one year on the job. They argue that she was probably 19 when she started training, having been 18 during much of her seventh year at Hogwarts. Harry will be 17 during his 7th year but he has a very late birthday, but he is not typical. Angelina must be 18 in most of her 7th year (OoP) as GoF told us that she turned 17 in October of her sixth year. << How old would Andromeda have been when her daughter was born? We know Harry was born when his parents were 21/22, so let's take that for now as the wizarding norm. (Only because there are no other clues..) That would make Andromeda 41/42--older than Bellatrix. >> With the adjustment in Tonks's age, that makes her 43 to 45. << With Andromeda as the middle sister, that automatically makes Narcissa the oldest. This might also make Narcissa older than her husband...but that's not exactly unheard of, is it? >> I would rather have Narcissa be 41, the same age as Lucius (stated in OoP). I like to think they made a love-match, based on a friendship they formed during all those years together in Slytherin House, based on their shared beliefs and values. That puts Narcissa as the middle sister. Perhaps one of the evil deeds of the Dark Wizards is that they list siblings on family trees in a random order instead of a chronological or alphabetical order. On the other tentacle, at one time I wanted the sequence to be Andromeda as the oldest and Bellatrix as the middle and Narcissa as the youngest, but then I found that a Narcissa younger than Sirius wouldn't be old enough to be Draco's mother. If I accept your argument that Bellatrix is 2 years older than Sirius, then my sequence is rescued. I like for Narcissa to be the youngest, because then she could be the offspring of a second wife who refused to go along with astronomical name nonsense. From kimberley42 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 22:01:20 2003 From: kimberley42 at yahoo.com (Kim) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 22:01:20 -0000 Subject: Pure Blood Fertility (was Malfoys on Weasleys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84450 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > > It still seems odd that the Malfoys have only one child though. Also > the Blacks had few children considering the obvious desperate need > for Pure Blood lines. One branch having only two the other only > three. Did they consider intermarrying their children? > > Of course the one advantage Lucius Malfoy has in Draco is the fact > that his son is now the single heir to two great family fortunes and > legacies. The Black's and Malfoy's have united under the Malfoy > name. Probably not something he imagined when he married the > youngest of three sisters with two male cousins. He is putting all > his eggs one basket though, not a strategy that seems to fit Lucius > Malfoy character. There definitely has to be more to the Malfoy's > lack of children. > > mandy I never thought there was more to it about Draco being an only child, than that Narcissa decided being pregnant was "icky" and never wanted to go through that again! In addition, do you think Lucius would have welcomed the need to be more solicitous to his wife, the Ice Queen? I don't think either Narcissa or Lucius are capable of being sympathetic with others, even with their own mate. Personally, even though Draco is turning out to be an evil little demon, I think he's doing it to try to get some sort of approval from his cold parents, and for that, I feel at least a LITTLE sorry for Draco. (Not much, but a little.) ---Kimberley From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 9 21:57:00 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 21:57:00 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black, Sorting Hat In-Reply-To: <20031109190348.72557.qmail@web20712.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84451 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Melanie Black wrote: > Carol wrote: >(That seems to back up the idea someone > expressed here recently that the Gryffindors and Ravenclaws have no > classes together. I wonder why not.) > > Melanie: > My reply: The Gryffindor and Ravenclaws in Harry's year must not have classes together however, the Ravenclaws and Gryffindors in Ginny's year obviously do. This is how Ginny and Luna know eachother so well and how they appear to be in class together at least during the time of the last talk in the fire. > Geoff: When I was still teaching, I was a member of the Timetable Team, a small group of staff who designed the timetable for each new school year. Often, we would group certain subjects, classes or staff members together and then, come the next year, new groups would be differently linked because staff had changed or were not available at the same time. There were many, many factors governing the way in which the timetable broke. I don't think there is anything strange (or sinister?) in the Hogwarts set up. From newyorkcutie200 at aol.com Sun Nov 9 23:03:34 2003 From: newyorkcutie200 at aol.com (newyorkcutie200 at aol.com) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 18:03:34 EST Subject: Which house did Moaning Myrtle belong to? Message-ID: <16a.2624d2bf.2ce021c6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84452 Fifty years ago, Hogwarts students had different uniforms, and they wore a pin to show what house they belonged to. For example in the COS movie, you can clearly see Tom Riddle's pin that shows he belongs to Slytherin. However, Moaning Myrtle 's pin is covered by her pigtails. This seems intentionally done. I have read in a past post that JK Rowling was trying to hide something in the COS that would have gave away too much for future books. Could Moaning Myrtle's house be important for books 6 and 7? Does anyone have any theories? Or is this just a stupid idea? "newyorkcutie" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From batsnumbereleven at yahoo.com Sun Nov 9 14:55:29 2003 From: batsnumbereleven at yahoo.com (batsnumbereleven) Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2003 14:55:29 -0000 Subject: Book 1 question In-Reply-To: <1a6.1c8049db.2cdfa320@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84453 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, kewiromeo at a... wrote: > > Now here is my question, and I think a direct response to me would > reach me better, but this is what I wanted to know. At what point does Harry > enter the magical wold? My teacher (the expert) seems to think that it was > when he steps onto the platform 9 3/4. I wrote a 23 page paper on this book > for my Comp 2 class and I wrote that Harry's crossing of the threshold was > the opening of the door in Diagon Alley. My answer would be: It depends what you mean by "entered the wizarding world". If you mean when he first becomes aware of wizardry, then the answer is when Hagrid tells him. The wizarding world itself is actually there all the time, just hidden from the sight of muggles. However, I think you can go back before the entrance to Diagon Alley - you could say that as soon as Harry enters The Leaky Cauldron, he is in the wizarding world. "batsnumberleleven" From cristina_angelo at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 00:36:42 2003 From: cristina_angelo at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Cristina_Rebelo_=C2ngelo?=) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 01:36:42 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Book 1 question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84454 Tzvi wrote: --- kewiromeo wrote: > I am taking a Litterature for children class and the teacher has us read SS. My teacher tells us, "I only read the book for this class, and I only read the > first book." At what point does Harry enter the > magical wold? My teacher (the expert) seems to think that it was when he steps > onto the platform 9 3/4. I wrote a 23 page paper on this book for my Comp 2 > class and I wrote that Harry's crossing of the threshold was the opening of the > door in Diagon Alley. Aussie wrote: (lots of stuff with which I was impressed) Tzvi, I for myself would like to have a go at reading your 23 pages. Now, do bear with me, I haven't done this in a long time, and I haven't prepared this answer in a proper academic way: I think there is a term confusion in your teacher's question, relative to (our established) canon lexicon. In HP, we refer mainly, and do correct me if I'm wrong, not to magical world, but to Wizarding World. I believe Harry was born in WW (I think he wasn't born in a muggle maternity), and left it for a long while when he was taken to the Dursleys. He was in and out of WW all his (known to us) life - same thing as embassies (for instance) are territory of their country within other countries' borders, I'd say Diagon Alley, St Mungo's, 12 Grimmauld Place (and other wizard houses), the MoM, etc are WW territory within, in this case, UK's borders (let me get Hogwarts off this UK list just in case...). Wizarding World has a Prime Minister. It has laws of itself. (enter discussion of definition of "country" and "nation") Here, both your answers are wrong, yours and your teacher's - we can't establish the first moment Harry entered WW. We can, however and only, establish the first time we *know/are told/ witness* he entered (where YOU are right) and the first time he left (at the time of OotP release, where the famous 24h period is not clarified by canon, the Dursleys). If I take "entering magical world" as meaning, not "having contact with" (in which I'd say, conscient acknowleadged contact, the moment Harry understood Hagrid did real magic, and that was before setting his feet into Diagon Alley), not "feeling sense of belonging with" (which I can't really pinpoint now, it envolves psychology theorie, but I'd probably say would be the moment Harry first felt he missed not being in the WW - sorry, I'm portuguese, I could never translate "saudade"), but as in entering *to stay*, making the "entrance" dependent of a (sorry, can only think of French word) "s?jour" (as if he was entering an age, or a meaningful period), I would say your teacher is right -even if I would still prefer to compare two situations of physical entrance, platform 9 3/4 and Hogwart's itself. However, and this is my personal position, if you take "entering magical world" as in "having magic within yourself", being a wizard and not a muggle, this would be the very first moment Harry did magic. Remember Neville. His "family thought (he) was all-Muggle for ages" untill his first magical moment at eight (PS, Scholastic, paperback (1999?) p. 125. This is the book your teacher admits, btw. She should be familiar with this quote. Now, can we really establish the first moment Harry did magic? Has it been established, without doubt, that what happened at Godric's Hollow Oct 31, 1981, was Harry's doing, and only Harry's? Do we know anything about Harry before that? Do we know for a fact the first time he did magic at the Dursleys? Because of the mixer (only heard of both of them a couple of days ago... been away...), I checked the Scholastic's site for the first time, and found their About the Books > Discussion Guide (for PS/SS HYPERLINK "http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/books/guides/sorcerers_stone.htm"http ://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/books/guides/sorcerers_stone.htm ). They were written by, I assume, someone who has been approved by JKR herself. I'd say his guides have been most likely been approved by her. I think this is an interesting question for him, if anyone here would like to ask him. Checked Bloomsbury's site, but am only muggle, and found nothing like that there. Sorry, I know there has been academic discussion about this (meaning, stuff you can fill your bibliography with for any paper you do for this class), but I've never actively researched it, and so am not familiar with academical legitimized HP experts... I'd say most of the people who were at Nimbus could give/ be names... This because. You don't tell of your academic experience (I assume that if you write 23 pages on this, you probably have some nice background...). You don't say exactly what level this class is. If I may add my (now, how many sickles exactly is two cents... of dollars? od euros?...) worth, and *think* I may give you advice, from my academic experience (and I only have a university degree, nothing really special; in Media Studies, meaning I'm more into Social Sciences than Physical ones - where basically anybody can say whatever they want as long as they find previous authors, who have not been completely laughed at by the "Academy", to back them up), I'd say the best way to shut up this teacher (and colleagues who think they're the only ones who have read the books...) is to legitimize your theories by quoting academic work. Basically, swamping her under nice names she'd be a fool to contradict (hey, she herself is giving a class on HP, not like she can say "yeah, only a weirdo would think HP is academic-material"). That way, if you think the grade she gives you (because you don't agree on the interpretation) is not what it should be, you actually have material to contest her capacities and competences to teach that class (more than anything we could say in this list...), and, if you're really pi***d at her, do something about it (other than getting something from Fred & George's shop to give her candidly :) Wow. My brain must be really getting better, because of you - didn't think I could write like this anymore :) C *** Cristina Rebelo ?ngelo HYPERLINK "http://www.cangelo.novelcity.com/"www.cangelo.novelcity.com / ICQ 106255886 / Yahoo Messenger cristina_angelo / Fax (USA) 001-425-920-0285 HPGCv1 a31 e++ x+ -- z+++ A27 Rhp HPa S+++ Mo HaP++ HG++ RW++ AD++ RH+++ VK& NhN& SB& DM--- O++ F sfD Any attached file not mentioned in the body of the message may be a virus; if present, delete it for the sake of your computer, and inform the sender. Thank you. "Quand on n'a que l'amour/ Pour tracer un chemin/ Et forcer le destin/ A chaque carrefour Quand on n'a que l'amour/ Pour parler aux canons/ Et rien qu'une chanson/ Pour coinvancre un tambour Alors sans avoir rien/ Que la force d'aimer/ Nous aurons dans nos mains/ Amis le monde entier" J.Brel 1956 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 06/11/2003 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From persephone_kore at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 01:02:12 2003 From: persephone_kore at yahoo.com (persephone_kore) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 01:02:12 -0000 Subject: Hermione's politics and tactics (was Re: Rowling's politics) In-Reply-To: <20031109184130.80109.qmail@web20705.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84455 Melanie Black wrote: > On the other hand, I personally love Hermione and her campaign against SPEW. I personally believe without a doubt that no person should be held under anyone else's power on the basis of who they are. That is what they are doing to the house elves, which are clearly a homage to slavery. PK: I'm not sure it /is/ entirely clear, or at least, that the analogy holds beyond a certain point. It's beyond doubt that the system as it stands is very sorely abused and that a number of problems -- to both sides, in fact -- stem from the fact that the power over whether to end the association is entirely in the hands of the wizards. I've also, however, found quotes where Rowling confirmed that she based the house elves on brownies -- on the folkloric elves who did housework and left if you gave them clothes -- and depending on which stories and particularly how far she takes it, the dynamic once the current state of things is resolved (which I've little doubt it will be -- it's very clear that the wizard-elf interrelations are one aspect of a major problem that needs addressing, and I can't imagine it'll just be dropped) could be... interesting. There's a fair amount of variation in the folklore, but one thing that's pretty constant is that the association is at the whim of the /elves/. It's entirely possible that house elves in HP used to sort of adopt human households as a variety of pet and look after them, and wizards eventually took advantage of their helpfulness and good nature to get control -- why does this sound all of a sudden like all the talk about cats ruling the world? Of course, it's entirely possible she isn't using that part. :) Melanie Black wrote: > One of the things that I find the most poingnant is Hermione believes in education, and I personally agree as well, education is the key to starting social reform. Maybe I'm a little crazy and alone here but I still maintain that these issues are ones that are appropriate for the books and I see no problem with them being in the books. PK: I agree that the issues are fine for the books -- I just have to confess that I think Hermione is in serious need of doing more research, probably of the "talk to people and actually listen" variety since she complained in GoF of the limited references in books. Her S.P.E.W. campaign in OotP left me feeling worried and rather lost; her tactics don't seem to make any sense. Unless there's something about Hogwarts students counting as employers, for one thing, I can't figure out how her knitted offerings are even supposed to accomplish anything. She also seems to have completely forgotten that she was once absolutely furious at Crouch Sr. for freeing Winky with no regard to her feelings on the matter. I suppose it /could/ be argued that getting the elves mad enough to conduct a quiet strike and stop cleaning Gryffindor tower is progress of a sort, but I don't think it's quite what Hermione had in mind. Besides, if Winky had the initiative to argue for Barty Jr.'s getting to attend the Quidditch World Cup, it strikes me that this level of assertiveness is not unusual enough to qualify. And, well... I would not want /one/ house elf mad at me, much less a hundred of them. It's a scary thought. In short, I think that /some/ of Hermione's views are seriously in need of adjustment, namely the ones where she thinks she knows enough to be going on with (because there has GOT to be more going on with the elves than meets the eye; definitely more than we know and I suspect more than most wizards know, and Hermione's studies so far are not leading her to be terribly effective) and where she thinks tricking them is a good idea (because I seriously doubt that on both a moral and a practical level). But I wouldn't dispute for a moment that this setup where elves serve entirely at the wizards' whim is unjust -- and dangerous! PK From cristina_angelo at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 01:11:28 2003 From: cristina_angelo at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Cristina_Rebelo_=C2ngelo?=) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 02:11:28 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Book 1 question In-Reply-To: <1a6.1c8049db.2cdfa320@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84456 Tzvi: My teacher tells us, "I only read the book for this class, and I only read the first book." Would you want your children having a teacher like this? a) Whether you like it or not, you read all 5 books and b) you are supposed to like the books, but no one is forcing them down your throat. She says shes trying to get a few children books published, but if she thinks she knows anything then I'd suggest reading the books. I think it is disgraceful of her to act so nonchalantly about this. Cristina: Let me just add this: from what I know of literature analysis (anybody heard of hermeneutics?... apart from the possibily poor english translation of my responsability) and XXth century theories, context is... well... *slightly* important. I believe it has been established that HP's books are too interconnected to analyse only one while refusing all possibility of even reading the others. You can, we all do that, analyse one by one when we don't know of the others (because they haven't been published yet). For academic purposes, we can work within that scope - but we have to, academically speaking, explain, academically, why we chose only that subject. And I don't think, academically speaking, that anyone has any authority to speak of something (which is not new, btw, and has been studied) when refusing to even look at other possibly meaningful material. It's basically like wanting to analyse Romeo and Juliette and saying I don't read any other of this author's work. If you're trying to do some solid academic work, and she is a teacher, you can actually lose credibility (and not pass the exam) when you neglect (talk about refusing!) to at least get acquainted with other work from the same author, significant work of other authors analysing that subject, etc etc. We may be perceived as Harry Potter geeks, throwing around words like canon and Potterverse, Harry Potter IS academic material. Not only because of its popular success (I'm thinking I once found a college class on Madonna on the Internet, for instance) - which case it is a subject of sociological study, which will envolve some sort of literarature study; not only because, even if some people may have doubts on this list on, for instance, can JKR write dialogs, IMMHO, the richness of most literary cathegories in JKR justifies academic analysis. But, mostly, because it has been done. There are papers out there. There are academics interested in HP. The books are now part of our culture, and of our literature. And even if JKR was a bad writer, her success would justify that someone tried to prove her literary incompetence. Your teacher's attitude is not disgraceful, in my opinion. In my opinion, it is academically incompetent. I don't think you will learn anything worthwhile from her. It reminds me of a technology teacher I once had who said there was an actual physical solid thingy in CD readers, don't believe those lies about a ray of light. We, the students, kicked that one out of teaching. Sorry for venting, this one has gotten me really... grrr. C *** Cristina Rebelo ?ngelo HYPERLINK "http://www.cangelo.novelcity.com/"www.cangelo.novelcity.com / ICQ 106255886 / Yahoo Messenger cristina_angelo / Fax (USA) 001-425-920-0285 HPGCv1 a31 e++ x+ -- z+++ A27 Rhp HPa S+++ Mo HaP++ HG++ RW++ AD++ RH+++ VK& NhN& SB& DM--- O++ F sfD Any attached file not mentioned in the body of the message may be a virus; if present, delete it for the sake of your computer, and inform the sender. Thank you. "Quand on n'a que l'amour/ Pour tracer un chemin/ Et forcer le destin/ A chaque carrefour Quand on n'a que l'amour/ Pour parler aux canons/ Et rien qu'une chanson/ Pour coinvancre un tambour Alors sans avoir rien/ Que la force d'aimer/ Nous aurons dans nos mains/ Amis le monde entier" J.Brel 1956 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 06/11/2003 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sydenmill at msn.com Mon Nov 10 03:19:54 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 03:19:54 -0000 Subject: Caput Draconis, WAS: Re: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84457 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote in message #84352: > JKR, in her last interview at the Royal Albert Hall, said we are > all getting far to fond of Draco, (snip) > Mandy Bohcoo responds: SS, ch. 7, page 130, American Edition: "'Caput Draconis,' said Percy, and the portrait swung forward to reveal a round hole in the wall." Remember SNUF-fles? Caput Draconis: Caput: Kaput -- "utterly defeated or destroyed; made useless or unable to function." {The Merriam-Webster Dictionary}) And, Draconis: Draco (n) is. Sorta looks a good bit like a hint , doesn't it? Maybe that is why JKR didn't want us getting too fond of him. He isn't going to be around that much longer. If someone else has discovered this too, but earlier, we are simply kindred souls. In my opinion, Bohcoo From jamielynncarlson at hotmail.com Mon Nov 10 03:56:41 2003 From: jamielynncarlson at hotmail.com (lynnfaragher78) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 03:56:41 -0000 Subject: Subject: Book 1 question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84458 Myself I believe that Harry entering the Leaky Cauldron is when Harry walks into the magical world....like the magical hospital (which cannot be "seen" by muggles) I believe that the Leaky Cauldron is like that.... I don't think muggles would be going into there.... SS page 68.....If Hagrid hadn't pointed it out, Harry wouldn't have noticed it there. The people hurrying by didn't glance at it. Their eyes slid from the big book shop on one side to the record shop on the other as if they couldn't see the Leaky Cauldron at all. In fact, Harry had the most peculiar feeling that only he and Hagrid could see it..... Lynn From catlady at wicca.net Mon Nov 10 04:46:51 2003 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 04:46:51 -0000 Subject: Caput Draconis, WAS: Re: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84459 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" wrote: > SS, ch. 7, page 130, American Edition: > "'Caput Draconis,' said Percy, and the portrait swung forward to > reveal a round hole in the wall." > > Remember SNUF-fles? > > Caput Draconis: > Caput: Kaput -- "utterly defeated or destroyed; made useless or > unable to function." {The Merriam-Webster Dictionary}) > And, Draconis: Draco (n) is. > > Sorta looks a good bit like a hint , doesn't it? Maybe that is why > JKR didn't want us getting too fond of him. He isn't going to be > around that much longer. Caput Draconis means 'the head of the dragon'. I've always felt it was somehow related to 'pig snout', another Gryffindor password, but I can't work 'fairy lights' or any of the others into a pattern. I thought there was a star named Caput Draconis, but what I have found between http://www.r-clarke.org.uk/propernames1.htm and http://www.ras.ucalgary.ca/~gibson/starnames/starnames.html?o=0 and http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~kaler/sow/sowlist.html is: Thuban (alpha Draconis) Rastaban (beta Draconis) Eltanin (gamma Draconis) Altais (delta Draconis) "Thuban is one of the fainter stars that carries a proper name, almost certainly because of its immense historical role as [a previous Pole Star]. Its importance is further highlighted in that it is the Alpha star of Draco (the Dragon) even though it not close to being the brightest of this long and rambling constellation, easily exceeded in visibility by Gamma, Beta, and even Eta Draconis. .... Even though the star is in the Dragon's tail, its name confusingly derives from an Arabic phrase meaning "the Serpent's head," having been borrowed from the name for another star." "The great northern serpent's neck points southward, Draco the Dragon's two leading stars looking like two eyes staring at Hercules. The names of both come from the same Arabic root, which means "the serpent." Eltanin (Gamma, the eastern star) means just that, "the serpent," while Rastaban (Beta, the western one) comes from a longer phrase that means "the serpent's head," and in fact was once applied to the star now known as Eltanin. Shining at the bright end of third magnitude (2.79), Rastaban is the just barely the third brightest star in the constellation, beat out by Eltanin and by Eta Draconis, though it still masters Thuban, the fainter Alpha star (whose name shares the same root)." "DELTA Dra : Nodus Secundus or Altais : second knot" or ?? (misreading of same word as in Gamma Dra)" btw, let me quite irrelevantly note the names of 3 stars in Libra: Zubenelgenubi "southern claw" (alpha) Zubenelschamali "northern claw (beta) Zubenelschamali "northern claw (gamma) From erinellii at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 06:02:55 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:02:55 -0000 Subject: Which house did Moaning Myrtle belong to? In-Reply-To: <16a.2624d2bf.2ce021c6@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84460 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, newyorkcutie200 at a... wrote: I have read in a past post that JK Rowling was trying to hide something in the COS that would have gave away too much for future books. Could Moaning > Myrtle's house be important for books 6 and 7? Does anyone have any theories? Or is this just a stupid idea? > "newyorkcutie" Erin: I like to believe she was a Slytherin. This makes sense to me for two reasons. I know a lot of people think of her as Hufflepuff from her appearence, and the fact that she was picked on, but I think that her behavior after death negates that. Namely, the way she haunted Olive Hornsby, the girl who had teased her while she was alive. The absolute pleasure she takes in telling Harry of her revenge definitely points towards her being placed in Slytherin IMO. The second reason that if she were a Slytherin, she could be THE good Slytherin that many people on this list believe in. We know (from a couple things JKR has said) that ghosts will figure in book seven. I think Myrtle will be the main ghost character when we get there. Lots of reasons for that. She's really quite different from the other ghosts we've met in many ways. She's younger, for instance. Both in years since she died, and her actual age at time of death. She's a kid, like the trio and friends, and so she really fits better into their world than any of the adult ghosts do. She seems to have the ability to affect/move objects, or at least water. I've seen posters write that perhaps this is something only ghosts who have died recently, or less than a hundred years ago, can do, because of Nearly Headless Nick's statement in SS/PS that he hasn't eaten in 400 years. We discover in CoS that Nick has actually been Dead for 500 years. Is this a Flint? Or could he actually eat those first hundred years? Can Myrtle eat now? The other ghosts seem to have made peace with their existence, while Myrtle is very unhappy about being dead. I think that if there is going to be a ghost who gets to "move on" to the next plane of existence, it will be Myrtle. Also, it seems suspicious to me that so many of the people who are now at Hogwarts, namely Dumbledore, McGonagall, Hagrid, and Myrtle, were all there when Tom Riddle was. I also think it very possible that Myrtle had a crush on Riddle while she was alive, mostly because she has one on Harry now and he and Riddle look alike. So, basically, I think that your idea is not stupid at all, as I firmly believe Moaning Myrtle will be very inportant in the last two books. Erin From steve at hp-lexicon.org Mon Nov 10 06:39:58 2003 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:39:58 -0000 Subject: Marauder's houses, was: Re: Sirius Black and Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84461 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" wrote: > Cheekyweebisom: > > >DEFINITELY not. Definitely. We know James was in Gryffindor. My > friend's run off with my books, so I can't give you a quote, but he > is in Gryffindor.< James is in Gryffindor. That's given in the book. It's on page 704 of the US edition of OP. Ron rumples his hair and Harry grins because it reminds him "forcibly of another Gryffindor Quidditch player...", which is a reference to James's actions Harry witnessed in Snape's memory. As for Lupin and Sirius, the conversation on page 170 (US) is the most telling. Clearly from Sirius' comments, only one of the three of them could have been made Prefect, and that one turned out to be Lupin. If they were in different houses, Lupin's being made Prefect would't have precluded the others from getting a badge too. I realize that this isn't going to convince those of you who have other theories, but honestly, it is extremely strong evidence indeed. When you add to that the other clues-- for example Sirius knowing the layout of Gryffindor Tower, right down to which dormitory would be hold third year boys in that particular year, and Lupin's favoritism toward Gryffindor's Quidditch team--it's pretty hard to believe any argument against them all being in Gryffindor. Peter Pettigrew, however, is the one question mark. Although I am convinced that if the others were in Gryffindor then Peter was too, there are no clues at all to back that up. We'll have to wait and see. Steve Vander Ark The Harry Potter Lexicon "Lexicon contamination"? I've never heard THAT one before! :) From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 06:50:17 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:50:17 -0000 Subject: Book 1 question - Wizard World at Large In-Reply-To: <1a6.1c8049db.2cdfa320@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84462 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, kewiromeo at a... wrote: > I am taking a Litterature for children class and the teacher has us > read SS. Now, as we have all read the book a million times I feel we > are the experts. My teacher tells us, "I only read the book for this > class, and I only read the first book." Would you want your children > having a teacher like this? ...edited... > bboy_mn: I'm not sure what the conflict is here. A book was selected for this teacher's Children's Liturature class. She read the book before the class began, so she knows what the book is about. Does that make her an expert in that one book? No. But her class isn't 'Harry Potter and the Sorcer's Stone', it's Childrens Liturature. She doesn't have to be an expert in that one book, but as a teacher, she has to be functionally knowledgable with regard to how HP*theSS fits into the genre of children's literature. > Tzvi: > > At what point does Harry enter the magical wold? My teacher seems to > think that it was when he steps onto the platform 9 3/4. I wrote ... > that Harry's crossing of the threshold ... of ... Diagon Alley. ... > stupid sorority girl yelled at me when I suggested this and said, "I > read all the books, and I know what I'm talking about." Maybe > there are some people that shouldn't read the book. > > Tzvi of Brooklyn bboy_mn: It's impossible to get the right answer unless you ask the right question. When did Harry ENTER the wizard world? Answer; on the day he was born. A better question; when did Harry RE-enter the wizard world? In this case, I would say he re-entered the wizard world when he set foot into the Leaky Cauldron. By entering that establishment that is simultaneouly right in front of muggle eyes, and yet hidden from them, when he step into a room full of wizards, witches, warlock, hags, and giants, he for the first time in nearly 10 year RE-entered the wizard world, and his presents in that world was acknowledge by members of that secret society. Regarding the 'stupid sorority girl' remark; I assume she was stupid because she was so absolutely certain of her own infallibility of opinion, that she was incapable of enter into even the most basic dialog about the other possiblities, rather than the fact that she was indeed a 'sorority girl'. If that is the case, then I would tend to agree with you. Regarding your opinon that Harry RE-entering the wizard world was when he entered Diagon Alley, I will agree that that opinion does have merit. I personally, as stated above, believe it was when he entered the Leaky Cauldron, but one could say that the Leaky Cauldron is but a small isolated segment of the wizard's community, but when he entered Diagon Alley, he truly entered the wizard world's full social order and structure; not a microcosm, but the wizard world at large. There is room for other opinions on this matter. I'm sure some will say it is when he entered Hogwarts. In my opinion, Platform 9-3/4 is probably the least significant of all his first few steps into the wizard world. However, if you combine Platform 9-3/4, the train ride, and his arrive and stay at Hogwarts as a single event, that lends greater credibility to this opinion, because with his arrive at Hogwarts he is permanently (or at least for 10 months of school) an active participating member of wizard society; he lives, eats, sleeps, resides, and studies in the wizard world. One could say that that is when he became a part of it again, rather than earlier entrances into the secret society which were very short and temporary. Opinions are like noses, everybody gets one. Just a thought. bboy_mn From darkthirty at shaw.ca Mon Nov 10 09:52:02 2003 From: darkthirty at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 09:52:02 -0000 Subject: BIC LIGHTER -> Book 1 question - Wizard World at Large In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84463 In fact, I always felt the conscious entrance to the witchwizard world occured on the train, as another train was the conscious entrance to the Harry Potter story for Rowling. The point where Potter no longer has to worry about the Dursley's, that is to say. Potter enters that world via his association with Ron, and Hermione, when the ability to do magic became something he shared with peers. In book terms, this means Hogwarts. Of course, in BIC LIGHTER terms, this also means that it happens with the "click" in Potter's mind that occurs when ideas "about" the witchwizard world become experiences "in" the witchwizard world. The Hogwarts Express is an extension of the school, a salient, as it were. So, Hogwarts is the entrance, and the train is part of Hogwarts. Something like that. The point of no return is another way of saying it. Or, how about, the point at which the witchwizard world takes on a life of its own? In all cases, however, it is the school, Potter's "home". t any rate, the question, however one looks at is, IMHO, a good one to ponder. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 10 10:06:48 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:06:48 -0000 Subject: TIPS - and traps - IN WORKING OUT CLUES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84464 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "artcase" wrote: > > Art here: > > But Dobby obviously came from the Malfoy's during COS, so the above > is challenged. Unless of course, Dobby aparated to Hogsmeade, then > slipped through the defences (TBD in later books I'm sure) and then, > finally, apparated into the Gryffindor common room. All that is a > little much if you ask me. All very true. Once inside Hogwarts I think Dobby could zip around without much trouble, but how the hell did he get there in the first place? Apparating would be by far the most convenient method but once again we ae stuck by not knowing if Elves are restricted in the same way that wizards are. Most unsatisfactory. Kneasy From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 10:27:26 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 02:27:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Portrait-Person Message-ID: <20031110102726.29307.qmail@web40009.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84465 10Nov03 Portrait-Person Catlady wrote: In my opinion, the magical portrait is a NEW PERSON who began as a copy of the model, with the personality traits and personal memories you mentioned, but after that the portrait has its own life experiences, no longer linked to the life experiences of the model. Paula now: I just can't see it this way. I agree that the portrait would have its own life experiences, but they would have to be based on and added to the person's (models) memories, outlook, and mentality. I'd always imagined that this is why one portrait would be chosen over another to carry out a specific mission, as in real life. The portrait retains the personality, traits, and experiences of the person. Yes, the portraits experiences must be different from the model because the model is no longer in this world. But the portrait carries on as the person would have. Catlady: I suppose that the spell for a later portrait is somewhat different than the spell for a first portrait, ...I suppose that the creation of a later portrait updates the model's-memories... Paula: Where is there any canon for this? I can't recall any canon that specifically explains the process and/or spells that an artist used to paint a portrait. That's why I think that the portrait is simply a vehicle for the departed to continue to function in this world. Catlady: But I firmly believe there is no telepathic link between the portrait-person and model-person after the painting is completed. Can I make an analogy of a xerox of a laser-printed document? The two copies start out the same but go on to separate lives. Paula: OK, there's something to this analogy. But IMHO, the WW is much more complicated and sophisticated than photocopying. Afterall, a portrait is a copy of one who was alive and functional in this world. Printed matter was never alive or capable of function on its own. It's just passively absorbed. ~Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Mon Nov 10 10:31:06 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:31:06 -0000 Subject: Caput Draconis, WAS: Re: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84466 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bohcoo" wrote: > > > SS, ch. 7, page 130, American Edition: > > "'Caput Draconis,' said Percy, and the portrait swung forward to > > reveal a round hole in the wall." > > > > Remember SNUF-fles? > > > > Caput Draconis: > > Caput: Kaput -- "utterly defeated or destroyed; made useless or > > unable to function." {The Merriam-Webster Dictionary}) > > And, Draconis: Draco (n) is. > > > > Sorta looks a good bit like a hint , doesn't it? Maybe that is why > > JKR didn't want us getting too fond of him. He isn't going to be > > around that much longer. > > Caput Draconis means 'the head of the dragon'. I've always felt it > was somehow related to 'pig snout', another Gryffindor password, (skip) "Caput Draconis" can also mean "Beginning of Initiation". See what Joseph Campbell wrote about the hero's journey in The Power of Myth. My two knuts, Iris From elfundeb at comcast.net Mon Nov 10 11:06:19 2003 From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 06:06:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:sexism in the WW (Was I know Molly.....) References: Message-ID: <00d101c3a77a$aafd94e0$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net> No: HPFGUIDX 84467 M.M. wrote: It is interesting (and I picked this up on first reading) that when they're in the kitchen of Grimmauld Place, and Molly's getting dinner, just like she always does, Tonks is the only auror who springs up and asks what she can do to help. This is after Tonks had a really long, hard day, too. I notice women in both the Wizarding World and the Muggle World tend to assume responsibility for the care and feeding of their families... and Tonks is even unmarried. Hermione knitting the hats in book 5 also brought this up for me. I'm not talking about blatent sexism here, but latent, and sometimes that's harder to ferret out and realize rather than the other kind. Debbie: I have to agree with M.M. here. While JKR seems to want to portray a WW without sexism, her writing and her characterizations reflect the real sexism in the world from which she takes her characters. Erin wrote: --- Erin wrote: > I mean this is a society in > which Alice Longbottom can be an auror during > the uprising of the most dangerous dark wizard > in a century, while she is pregnant and while > she has a young baby. I think the WW is a lot > less sexist than you're trying to make it out > to be. Debbie: I see this as an example of JKR having become more conscious of her own gender biases in writing characters. The first four novels had been criticized for their gender portrayals, most notably in a Salon article not long after GoF was published. In GoF, there is absolutely no mention that Alice was an Auror. Crouch states that the Lestranges et al. were accused of "capturing an Auror -- Frank Longbottom -- and subjecting him to the Cruciatus Curse" and further accused "of using the Cruciatus Curse on Frank Longbottom's wife." Dumbledore says later when Harry asks whether they were talking about Neville's parents, "His father, Frank, was an Auror just like Professor Moody. He and his wife were tortured for information about Voldemort's whereabouts after he lost his powers, as you heard." In OoP, on the other hand, they were both described as Aurors. The difference is so striking, I'm left with the nagging feeling that Alice was promoted between books. There are other ways in which the sexism of our own world has crept into the books regardless of JKR's intentions. While we are aware, mostly through historical details presented in the novels and in FBAWTFT, that there have been women in positions of power in the WW, the MoM characters that play a significant role in the story -- with the exception of Umbridge the villain (who I see as a bureaucratic functionary run amok) -- are male. Thus, while we know that Fudge's predecessor was female, we know nothing about her. Amelia Bones has the same position once held by Crouch Sr., but in her only scene, she allows Harry's hearing to be commandeered by Fudge in a dereliction of due process. It was her department, and I can't imagine that JKR would have let that happen if Crouch was still in charge. Thus, while she speaks her mind at the hearing, she appears ineffectual. Also, it is strongly implied that Amelia Bones is single. (If she is Susan Bones' aunt and she is married, by the WW conventions we see she would have a different last name.) In the WW, as well as here, it appears that women have a much more difficult time reaching the top of their professions if they must juggle work and family. Thus, though we are given examples in OoP that I think are intended ot imply gender equity (Elfrida Clagg as MoM, Dilys as former headmistress of Hogwarts), when we look at the characters closely, it's clear that they must face the same conflict between career and children that we all do. The other women we know that work for the MoM (Mafalda Hopkirk, Bertha Jorkins, Marietta's mother) don't appear to have high-ranking positions, and Marietta's mother, the our only WW example of mother with a paying job(Hermione's parents are muggles and don't count) fears for her position if her daughter was found to be associating with Harry Potter. And while there are plenty of female professors (and former headmistresses) at Hogwarts, one of the qualifications for the job seems to be a lack of a spouse. Moreover, though I think JKR made a very specific effort in OOP to give McGonagall more spunk than she had in the past, her spunk manifests in catfights with other women professors, such as Trelawney and Umbridge, which is stereotypically female behavior. Like Molly, McGonagall remains a shadowy figure as far as her contribution to the Order is concerned. JKR has clearly moved forward in this book, but I think she's subconsciously, perhaps, drawn too much on her own background and experience in drawing the characters and selecting their gender. Debbie who wants Amelia Bones' job [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 02:16:19 2003 From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 02:16:19 -0000 Subject: Which house did Moaning Myrtle belong to? In-Reply-To: <16a.2624d2bf.2ce021c6@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84468 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, newyorkcutie200 at a... wrote: > Fifty years ago, Hogwarts students had different uniforms, and they wore > a pin to show what house they belonged to. For example in the COS movie, you > can clearly see Tom Riddle's pin that shows he belongs to Slytherin. However, > Moaning Myrtle 's pin is covered by her pigtails. This seems intentionally > done. I have read in a past post that JK Rowling was trying to hide something in the COS that would have gave away too much for future books. Could Moaning > Myrtle's house be important for books 6 and 7? Does anyone have any theories? Or is this just a stupid idea? > > "newyorkcutie" > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] psychobirdgirl(me): That's a really intriguing question. I think Myrtle's house identity could be important later on. She doesn't seem overly brave or intelligent, so that rules out Gryffindor and Ravenclaw. She doesn't seem very ambitious, but that doesn't rule out Slytherin in my mind because I've never seen Crabbe or Goyle be ambitious. She could be a Hufflepuff, but I don't think a Hufflepuff would be a vengeful ghost like she said she was. To me, Slytherin is where the inherently bad students go, Gryffindor the outstandingly brave, Ravenclaw the above average intelligent, and Hufflepuff the inherently good but not otherwise outstanding. So since I see nothing outstanding about Myrtle my guess would be either Slytherin or Hufflepuff, because I'm undecided on whether she is good or evil. I think the importance of this is that when we find out her house we will find out also the how and why of whether she is good or evil. psychobirdgirl From moorequests at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 03:09:53 2003 From: moorequests at yahoo.com (moorequests) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 03:09:53 -0000 Subject: Open apology to M.M. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84469 Samnanya wrote: >>>The RH vs HH argument goes more to the "oppositesattract" (RH) vs. "will Harry ever get his head out of his butt and notice that Hermione really does love him?"(HH) schools of thought. And if you think that there isnt at least SOME attraction between Hermione and Harry, atleast on Hermione's part, well...>>> To which M.M. responded: >>I am sorry, your last line just seems to be implying that *I* should get my head out of my butt. If that is true, then you must at least present some evidence on behalf of your case. :)>> And *then* Samnanya wrote: >Please accept my apologies. I never ever intentionally try to insult any poster and if what I said, or in this case indirectly implied, caused offense I am mortified and ashamed. That said, I am truly sorry if you were offended. Please accept my apology.> That's ok! Apology accepted. We all misinterpret things on the WWW sometimes, and I probably did in this case. Thanks for the heartfelt apology... no big deal. I'm posting this to the list so everyone knows it was no problem, hopefully the mods will let it through. (hint, hint, mods) -M.M. From nibleswik at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 04:51:32 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 04:51:32 -0000 Subject: Caput Draconis, WAS: Re: Fate of HANDSOME guys In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84470 > > JKR, in her last interview at the Royal Albert Hall, said we are > > all getting far to fond of Draco. Bohcoo: > SS, ch. 7, page 130, American Edition: > "'Caput Draconis,' said Percy, and the portrait swung forward to > reveal a round hole in the wall." > > Remember SNUF-fles? > > Caput Draconis: > Caput: Kaput -- "utterly defeated or destroyed; made useless or > unable to function." {The Merriam-Webster Dictionary}) > And, Draconis: Draco (n) is. > > Sorta looks a good bit like a hint , doesn't it? Maybe that is why > JKR didn't want us getting too fond of him. He isn't going to be > around that much longer. Me: I don't speak even a little Latin, but I always took the "Draconis" to mean "dragon", as "Draco" does. I never thought of it as bye-bye Malfoy. I think it's stretching it to call that a hint. She very well may kill Draco off, but she had better do it in an interesting way, as I'll be very sorry to see him go. He's so cardboard at this point; I really think he has a lot of potential as a character, whether he becomes a DE or, as I'd like, a total bastard who isn't ESE, a la Snape. Cheekyweebisom From nibleswik at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 05:30:39 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 05:30:39 -0000 Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint by having him not? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84471 Why does Snape hate Harry? Because he hated James and Harry reminds him of James. Following that, shouldn't Snape despise Draco? I mean, Harry's father was an asshole to Snape, but Draco's dad is a DE! And Snape's the anti-DE, in some ways, more than DD is. I think Snape's the ultimate anti-DE because he went through it; the most fervent are often those who experienced that which they're fighting against. But in any case, Snape's waging a war against Lucius, yet Draco's his favorite? What the hell?! It seems to me that there must be something else going on here. What could make Snape favor the child of a DE? I can think of a few things: -Snape is still working for LV. -Snape doesn't know Lucius is a DE. -Snape simply needs someone to favor in each year, and Draco's the most promising, future DE or not. -Draco is Snape's sex toy, and as such, gets preferential treatment. -Snape wants to train a replacement -- a Slytherin who can do work for the Order. Who better than the son of one of LV's right-hand men, provided he can convert Draco to the good side? The first I refuse to believe. No! Snape is good! He's a dickhead, but he's good! The second is simply silly -- Snape was a DE, after all. How could he just have *missed* Lucius in the throng of evildoers? And even if he had, DD knows, and I doubt he'd keep anything from Snape he wasn't keeping from Harry. The third is possible but doesn't square with my ideas about Snape's moral code. The fourth is not going to appear in a children's novel for a LONG time, if ever. But the fifth . . . ah! Could that be it? It would certainly be interesting. It opens up all sorts of possibilities for Draco's behavior -- is Draco ESE or is he pretending? Is he already setting up his spy behavior in some capacity; that is, making himself appear to be ESE so as not to arouse the suspicions of others? Granted, it doesn't mesh with the picture of Draco we have, but if it's all an act, we might not know Draco at all. JKR has done that before with characters. Could Draco be similar to Barty Crouch, Jr. in a way, except without the Polyjuice and evilness? I think it would be really interesting. And then if Draco were to die, he could even die doing something good. I do believe that Draco is ambitious, but if he sees the future in being aligned with DD & Co., not LV, ambition and doing good stuff aren't even mutually exclusive. Has he already a stomach for murder? I don't know that he does. And stuff. I may just be grasping at straws, but I wonder what the basis of Snape's affection, if it can be called that, for Draco is. What do you think? What other possibilities for Snape's liking of Draco are there? Do you think Draco's set in his ESE ways? Cheekyweebisom, who really doesn't want Draco to be ESE, because she thinks it would be the single most boring choice in the history of writing and, for that matter, oral tradition. From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 10 07:52:23 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 07:52:23 -0000 Subject: Caput Draconis, WAS: Re: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84472 >> JKR, in her last interview at the Royal Albert Hall, said we are all getting far to fond of Draco, (snip)>> Bohcoo: > Caput Draconis: Caput: Kaput -- "utterly defeated or destroyed; made useless or unable to function." {The Merriam-Webster Dictionary}) And, Draconis: Draco (n) is.> Geoff: Sorry, but it's Latin. Draco = dragon, Caput = head. Hence Caput Draconis = "head of the dragon". One might also start drawing hints from the Hogwarts motto: Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus = "Never tickle a sleeping dragon". Glad my Latin still comes in useful sometimes. OK - now who's going to translate that as "Never tickle a sleeping Draco" and start a new Slytherin thread? :-) From lunatique0619 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 08:39:22 2003 From: lunatique0619 at yahoo.com (Jee H. Lee) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 00:39:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Draco / the Black Sisters In-Reply-To: <1068434412.12546.45666.m18@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20031110083922.58128.qmail@web13114.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84473 > Personally, even though Draco is turning out to be an evil little > demon, I think he's doing it to try to get some sort of approval from > his cold parents, and for that, I feel at least a LITTLE sorry for > Draco. (Not much, but a little.) Like just about everything else in the fandom this must have been said a million times, but in Book 4 where Harry asks Draco if his mother always looked like she had dung under her nose or only around him, I always thought Draco might have been so angry because the comment cut too close to home. He does seem to flaunt the affections of his parents a little too much(handing out sweets, bragging how he didn't go to Durmstrang because his mother wanted him close). Overcompensation, perhaps? Catlady: > I hope Sirius *meant* he hadn't *spoken* with her, because I very > much want Bellatrix and everyone else in Severus's little friendship > group of Slytherin schoolmates to be the same age as Severus and > Sirius. The fun thing about arguing small details in canon is that no one can be any more "right" than anyone else. The available evidence presents a myriad of possible and equally valid interpretations. In other words, your guess is as good as mine, or anyone's. We could say Sirius meant that he didn't speak to her since then, possibly as a result of his leaving home at sixteen(still close enough to be considered Harry's age). Still, I believe that by "see" Sirius meant seeing, not speaking to Bellatrix, because he mentions seeing a glimpse of her coming to Azkaban in the same context. Besides, I think we see entirely too much of the Marauder year people--class of '77?--as it is. Catlady: > IIRC other posters have placed Tonks at 22 or 23 ... > With the adjustment in Tonks's age, that makes [Andromeda] 43 to 45. Hmm, I hadn't thought of that. That seems a more reasonable way of seeing things. You Westerners' way of having people age on their birthdays confuses the hell out of me. :) Why can't you have everyone gain a year on New Year's Day like sensible people do? ;) Catlady: > I would rather have Narcissa be 41, the same age as Lucius (stated in > OoP). I like to think they made a love-match, based on a friendship > they formed during all those years together in Slytherin House, based > on their shared beliefs and values. Sure, why not? As others have said, maybe we're just too used to seeing Lucius and Narcissa, and all Slytherins, as Evil Incarnate. On the other hand, they could still be Evil Incarnate *and* be deeply in love. It's too easy to think of evil as something other than human, just to distance ourselves from the unsavory. In the same vein, it's unsettling to think villains are human enough to truly fall in love. Unfortunately that's real life because bad people are, well, people, too. Catlady: > Perhaps one of the evil deeds of the Dark Wizards is that > they list siblings on family trees in a random order instead of a > chronological or alphabetical order. The fiends! :D Family trees are very important for Koreans, we have whole books of them. (My own dates back to 1083 or so.) In these books siblings are absolutely listed in order of age, because older and younger is very important in establishing pecking order. Also, the eldest son always inherited everything in the old days, making order of birth even more crucial. As I understand, Britain used to have eldest-son inheritance, too. I imagine that would make order of birth pretty important and in turn, have sons listed in that order on their family trees. This is likely to spill over to the daughters as well. I remember when I read Jane Austen's works, only the eldest daughter was called by her family name(e.g. Miss Bertram), while the younger daughters were called by their first names(e.g. Miss Julia). So that, again, seems to evidence the importance of seniority, something that's likely to find expression in the form of family trees. Catlady: > I like for Narcissa to be the youngest, because > then she could be the offspring of a second wife who refused to go > along with astronomical name nonsense. Heh, I thought that was a little odd, too. While flower names seem to be a staple among wizarding folk, the Black family seemed to have such an affinity for constellations, at least for their latest generation. Jee H. Lee From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 10 10:48:22 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:48:22 -0000 Subject: Book 1 question In-Reply-To: <1a6.1c8049db.2cdfa320@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84474 I originally replied to tzvi directly and haven't commented on the group so far. I would disagree with the teacher that the point of (re)entry to the wizarding world was Platform 9 3/4. I overlooked the fact that, of course, Harry's entry to the WW was at his birth. However, having considered the Leaky Cauldron as a possibility - as have various other commentators - my own feel for this is that Harry's re-entry occurred when Hagrid said to him: "Harry -yer a wizard." (PS p. 42 UK edition) Odd things had happened up to there. The roof, the hair, the snake, the letters but they didn't make sense to Harry. Now, although he has to have the fact confirmed in his mind in the next couple of sentences, he receives a new insight into his life. His frame of reference changes. I would relate it in my own personal experience to becoming a Christian. Suddenly, your whole frame of reference changes and you see life in a totally different way. But, as has been pointed out, you need to read all the books to follow it through. To say that only the first book counts is a distortion. What would happen if you read only the "Fellowship of the Ring" and ignored the rest - or only "The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" of the Narnia series nd ignored the other six books? Geoff From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Mon Nov 10 12:56:16 2003 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:56:16 -0000 Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint by having him not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84475 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nibleswik" wrote: It seems to me that there must be something else going on here. What could make Snape favor the child of a DE? I can think of a few things: -Snape is still working for LV. -Snape doesn't know Lucius is a DE. -Snape simply needs someone to favor in each year, and Draco's the most promising, future DE or not. -Draco is Snape's sex toy, and as such, gets preferential treatment. -Snape wants to train a replacement -- a Slytherin who can do work for the Order. Who better than the son of one of LV's right-hand men, provided he can convert Draco to the good side? 1) From the way Snape tells Harry: "Yes, that's my job!" (spying on the DE's) I can only conclude (knowing Snape and knowing Rowling's tricky writing) that he is NOT the one spying on Voldemort and the DE's. But I don't think he's still working for LV either. I just don't see how he could. 2) Snape knows very well that Lucius turned up at the graveyard when LV summoned the DE's because Harry told him so. We still need to figure out though why it surprised Snape that Lucius was there. 3) Snape knows that Draco despises Harry and that might be one obvious reason Snape favors Draco. 4) That's cute. But unlikely. It would be just too easy for Snape to go for Draco - Im sure he'd want more of a challenge - say Hermione maybe? :-) 5) If Draco really likes Snape and trusts him - then it would be a very good reason for Snape to keep favoring Draco. Snape might be the one to eventually get Draco on the 'good side' - depending of course how the relationship between Snape and Lucius has been in the past and what it will be like in the future. Inge From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 13:23:29 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:23:29 -0000 Subject: Book 1 question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84476 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: However, having considered the Leaky Cauldron as a possibility - as > have various other commentators - my own feel for this is that > Harry's re-entry occurred when Hagrid said to him: > > "Harry -yer a wizard." (PS p. 42 UK edition) > I would relate it in my own personal experience to > becoming a Christian. Suddenly, your whole frame of reference changes and you see life in a totally different way. Laura: Or you could take the question and break it down even further by asking this: is being a member of the WW something that happens to you whether you choose it or not, or is it something you have to choose volitionally? The question has been raised on this board before in other contexts as to whether a person born with magical powers could reject those powers and live as a muggle. I'm adding to the inquiry by asking whether being a witch or wizard is a physical or mental state or both. Is it a status or a condition? Aside to Tzvi: Try not to take your professor's attitude too hard. As HP fans know, there's a certain amount of hostility to the books out there in academia. A lot of it is motivated by petty jealousy, sad to say-you always hope that educated people would be above that kind of nonsense. There's an idea in the worlds of publishing and academia that writers of children's literature are allowed only a certain amount of success, but anything beyond some arbitrary point is unseemly. They can have fans and sell a few hundred thousand copies of their books, but if they hit it big, they're selling out somehow. Forget it-it's sheer hypocrisy. In a world in which we use our children as billboards for every conceivable brand name, an author who becomes a huge success should be celebrated, not condemned. Besides, I bet some people in your class will get turned on to HP and the fandom will be that much stronger! Rant over. And a happy Monday to all! Laura From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 10 13:27:34 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:27:34 -0000 Subject: Never tickle a sleeping dragon WAS: Caput Draconis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84477 Geoff wrote: > One might also start drawing hints from the Hogwarts motto: Draco > dormiens nunquam titillandus = "Never tickle a sleeping dragon". > > OK - now who's going to translate that as "Never tickle a sleeping > Draco" and start a new Slytherin thread? > :-) Me: I don't know if the topic is interesting enough to start a new thread, but I would like to comment on the very interesting question you raise about the Hogwarts motto. Because I have got a distinct impression that is actually what Harry did at the end of OoP, "tickled a sleeping Draco"... On pages 749-751 (British Version) Harry bumps into Draco in the Entrance Hall. To me this little incident describes a "new" Draco, a much more dangerous Draco. Up till now Draco has just been "having fun" acting out the bad kid. Harry landing his father in prison (and ridiculing him in front of Draco) has however turned him into a potential Death Eater. Just read those pages, and you see a Draco angrier than Harry had ever seen him, his pale face "contorted with rage". And his voice is quiet, whispering, no more of the loud, boisterous drawling. But the most significant sign of Draco's change of attitude is the way he talks about his father. In the previous books he has always referred to him using the more formal "Father", but now he even calls him "Dad". Now, that's significant if you ask me :-) My two knuts: Harry's in deep trouble. Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus... Berit From FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com Mon Nov 10 13:30:08 2003 From: FilkMavenGB at hotmail.com (Gail Ann Bohacek) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:30:08 -0000 Subject: (FILK) Tournament of Horrors (Three Filks) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84478 Tournament of Horrors (A Filked Musical Work In Progress by Gail Bohacek. Three filks: _Tournament of Horrors_ to the tune _Little Shop of Horrors_, _Goblet of Fire_ to the tune _Skidrow / Downtown_ and _Da-doo_ to the tune _Da-doo_) This musical here has really been stretching my filking ablities. I really do hope you enjoy singing along with them as much as I've enjoyed writing them. You can find Midis here: http://addagirl.com/littleshop.htm Dedicated to CMC Constance Vigilance and Wendy St. James ************************************************************** Tournament of Horrors Act I, scene I (Cue "Prologue" Music) (Spot light on Dumbledore as he enters, stage left, in front of a closed curtain) Dumbledore: On the 31st day in the month of October, in an early year of a decade not too long before our own, the Wizarding World suddenly had to face a deadly threat to its very existence. And this terrifying enemy surfaced, as such enemies often do, under the seemingly most innocent and unlikely of circumstances. (Exit, stage left) (Cue "Tournament Of Horrors" Music) (Enter Angelina, Katie and Alicia, stage right) Angelina, Katie and Alicia: Tournament, Tournament a-Horrors Tournament, Tournament a-Terror Big event! Tournament a-Horrors No, oh, oh, no-oh! Tournament, Tournament a-Horrors Excellent! A musical of Book Four The advent of Dark Lord Voldemort No, oh, oh, no-oh Shing-a-ling, in the beginning Without a warning (Look out! Look out! Look out! Look out!) Shang-a-lang, Voldy's trap had sprang Moody's snared (yeah, yeah, yeah!) Sha-la-la, Harry's light'ing scar Is a-hurtin' him (Dumbledore) Dumbledore, Voldemort he tricked him And now Potter will be his next victim He better, Harry Potter better Beware! (Curtain rises to reveal Hogwarts' Great Hall where everybody is assembled for the Halloween Feast) Come-a, come-a, come-a Tournament, not even the Aurors Can prevent what Voldy has in store Tournament, Tournament of Horrors No, oh, oh. No, oh, oh No, oh, oh, oh, nooooo! (Angelina, Katie and Alicia take their seats at the Gryffindor table. Enter Harry, Ron and Hermione, stage right) Harry: I wonder what this "Special Announcement" that everybody has been hinting at? Ron: Yeah, and why it's such a big secret? Hermione: Shhhh, you two...Dumbledore is speaking. (The Trio sit down at the Gryffindor table as Dumbledore, at the Head Table, stands to speak) Dumbledore: As ever, it is my duty to remind you all that the Forest in the grounds is out-of-bounds to students, as is the village of Hogsmeade to all below third year. It is also my painful duty to inform you that the Inter-House Quidditch Cup will not take place this year. Harry: *What*! Dumbledore: This is due to an event that will be continuing throughout the school year, taking up much of the teachers' time and energy - but I am sure you will all enjoy it immensely. I have great pleasure in announcing that this year at Hogwarts we will be hosting the Triwizard Tournament! Fred: You're JOKING! (General excitement is heard from the Company) Dumbledore: A champion will be selected to represent the three largest European schools and these three champions will compete in three magical tasks. An impartial judge will decide which students are most worthy to compete for the Triwizard Cup, the glory of their school, and a thousand Galleons personal prize money! (Even more excitement) And now, the moment has come, the Tournament is about to start. The casket, then, if you please, Mr. Filch. (Cue music for "Goblet of Fire") Katie (standing up): Argus brings up the casket And he sets it down Dumbledore reaches inside We can not hide our excitement when (Angelina (spoken): Sing it, chil' !) The Headmaster says, Dumbledore: This is the.... Angelina, Katie, Alicia: Goblet For the Tri-Wiz Game If the Goblet Chooses your good name Then the Goblet Will give you the fame you desire Goblet of Fire (Goblet of Fire) Dumbledore: Yes, that's right... Angelina, Katie, Alicia: Goblet Madame Maxine: A competition Angelina, Katie, Alicia: Goblet Karkaroff: Where the best school wins Angelina, Katie, Alicia: Goblet Fudge and Bagman: We just hope nothin' goes haywire Company: Goblet of Fire Angelina, Katie, Alicia: Three schools, Hogwarts, Durmstrang and Beauxbaton The Goblet picks for them a Champion They tell us that there have been casualties before So to play you must be seventeen or more The Goblet's surrounded by an Age Line The twins they tried to cross it but were both declined The two of them were thrown back and had grown long beards As everyone watched on and jeered Dumbledore: They tried because Company: Fred and George: Goblet When the tasks are done Goblet A thousand Galleons Goblet Will go to the one whose score's higher Goblet of Fire Goblet of Fire Goblet of Fire Goblet of Fire Goblet of Fire Goblet of Fire Company: Goblet of Fire! Moody!Barty: You're thinking I'm a friend of D'dore I'm actually an impostor Faithful servant of the Dark Lord In Auror's attire I'll secretly enter Potters name into the Goblet of Fire Pretending I'm Mad-Eye Moody I'll hide And I'll guide Potter though Make sure he wins so You-Know-Who Can return! Company: So now the Goblet I'll easily fool, in the Goblet I'll place a fourth school This here Goblet Is the perfect tool we require Goblet of Fire Then the Dark Lord will strike just the way he planned And begin the Fourth Reich with him at command We are so much alike, it will be so grand I will be there to fight at his right hand (Moody!Barty) Dumbledore/Snape/McGonagall (Company): (Goblet) We're reading the signs (Wow, it sure would be great if my name's chosen) (Goblet) And things don't look fine (I would sure celebrate if my name's chosen) (Goblet) Different crimes we see have transpired (Won't be long of a wait 'till they are chosen) (Very soon the Goblet will select them) We know that (Goblet) Jorkin's disappeared (Wonder who it will be that has been chosen?) (Goblet) Bryce is dead, we hear (Move in close, wanna see as they are chosen) (Goblet) The situation's pretty dire (Looks like it is ready, the names are chosen) (It's beginning to glow - it's the Goblet of - ) (Goblet) (Getting ready to show, this here Goblet of - ) (Goblet) (In a moment we'll know, from the Goblet of - ) (Goblet) (Which three names will be thrown from the Goblet of - ) All: Fire! (Black out except for a single spot light focused on the Goblet of Fire, which is glowing magically. Curtain falls. ) Act I, scene II. In front of the curtain, the Gryffindor Common Room. (Enter the Gryffindors, stage right, headed by Fred and George Weasley. They are cheering with excitement. Enter Harry, stage right . He is grabbed as the Gryffindors scream, applaud and whistle even louder) Fred: You should have told us you'd entered! Harry: But... George: How did you do it without getting a beard? Brilliant! Harry: I didn't. I don't know how - Angelina: Oh, if it couldn't be me, at least it's a Gryffindor! Katie: You'll be able to pay back Diggory for that last Quidditch match, Harry! Colin: We've got food, Harry, come and have some! Ginny: Tell us again what happened, Harry! Tell us again! Harry: Well.... (Cue music for "Da-Doo") Harry (lines are spoken) (Angelina, Katie, Alicia): (Da-doo!) Everybody in the Great Hall was waiting in anticipation (Shoop da-doo) When the Goblet chose the champion for Durmstrang... (Krum, da-doo) The Beauxbaton champion was that silver-haired girl Ron liked... (Fleur, da-doo) And for Hogwarts, the Goblet choose Cedric Diggory (Da da da da da da-doo) Everybody was cheering the three Champions (Yeah! da-doo) And we all thought, you know, that it was all over (It was through) When suddenly And without warning, we saw a fourth name come out of the cup! It got very quiet, and Dumbledore just stood there looking at the name on the card for a long while. (Da-doo) And when he finally spoke he said the name of the person on the card (It was you) But you know, I was totally surprised! (That's untrue) Now, I swear that I didn't put my name in, But they told me I had to play anyway 'Cause those are the rules of the game (Sha la la, la la la, la la la loooo!) Fred: Yeah, right. We know you did it. Harry: No, really. I didn't. (Everybody starts to leave) Harry: Ron! Ron, you believe me, don't cha? Ron: It's okay, you know, you can tell *me* the truth. If you don't want everybody else to know, fine, but I don't know why you're bothering to lie, you didn't get into trouble for it, did you? Harry: It's not a lie! I didn't put my name in the Goblet! Ron: Yeah, okay. Only you said this morning you'd have done it last night, and not one would have seen you...I'm not stupid, you know. Harry: You're doing a really good impression of it. Ron: Yeah? You want to go to bed, Harry. I expect you'll need to be up early tomorrow for a photocall or something. (Exit Ron. Black out) -Gail...more to come later... From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Mon Nov 10 14:04:25 2003 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:04:25 -0000 Subject: Never tickle a sleeping dragon WAS: Caput Draconis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84479 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > I don't know if the topic is interesting enough to start a new > thread, but I would like to comment on the very interesting question > you raise about the Hogwarts motto. Because I have got a distinct > impression that is actually what Harry did at the end of > OoP, "tickled a sleeping Draco"... On pages 749-751 (British Version) > Harry bumps into Draco in the Entrance Hall. To me this little > incident describes a "new" Draco, a much more dangerous Draco. Up > till now Draco has just been "having fun" acting out the bad kid. > Harry landing his father in prison (and ridiculing him in front of > Draco) has however turned him into a potential Death Eater. Just read > those pages, and you see a Draco angrier than Harry had ever seen > him, his pale face "contorted with rage". And his voice is quiet, > whispering, no more of the loud, boisterous drawling. But the most > significant sign of Draco's change of attitude is the way he talks > about his father. In the previous books he has always referred to him > using the more formal "Father", but now he even calls him "Dad". Now, > that's significant if you ask me :-) > > My two knuts: Harry's in deep trouble. Draco dormiens nunquam > titillandus... > > Berit Oh, I love that. I would really like to see more, dangerous and hateful situations between Harry and Draco in the next books (are there really only 2 more left? Can't believe it!) The incident you describe above is one of the most tense encounters between the two of them yet - and this is also the first time (if I remember correctly) that Harry is the one to actually want the situation to develop. Too bad Snape had to show up at the very moment Harry was ready to use his wand. I'd love to see what would have happened if there had been no interference from a teacher. Inge From entropymail at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 14:05:33 2003 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:05:33 -0000 Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint by having him not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84480 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nibleswik" > wrote: > > It seems to me that there must be something else going on here. What > could make Snape favor the child of a DE? This may all be part of Snape's spying game. If he really does have to play "Malfoy's lapdog", as Sirius says, then it would be beneficial for him to get in good with Lucius's son, as well. Draco certainly mentions the goings-on at Hogwarts when he is at home (" '...everyone thinks he's so smart, wonderful Potter with his scar and his broomstick--' 'You have told me this at least a dozen times already,' said Mr. Malfoy, with a quelling look at his son." CoS, ch 4.) and if Snape can plant a good word about himself into those conversations, all the better to keep Lucius's suspicions at bay. Having Draco report to his father about Snape's preferential treatment of him (and Slytherins and general), as well at his utter hatred for Harry Potter (and Gryffindors in general) is all the better for Snape. Besides, if Snape is so skilled at occlumency and legilimency, it's a good bet that Malfoy may be as well (it's such a slytherin-y thing to do). So, the more "good" memories Snape can create for himself regarding Draco, and the more "bad" memories he can create of Harry, the better it will be for him if anyone ever tries to crack into that cobwebby brain of his. :: Entropy :: From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Mon Nov 10 14:14:17 2003 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:14:17 +0000 (GMT) Subject: crowns and the Alchymical Wedding Message-ID: <20031110141417.74523.qmail@web25105.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84481 Harry Potter never ceases to delight and surprise me. I keep finding more gems hidden away in the nooks and crannies of the story. I came upon this sentence right in the beginning of chapter 10 of OoP. "Mrs Weasley sobbed over Kreacher's dead body, watched by Ron and Hermione who were wearing crowns." Wearing crowns! How could I have missed that! It hit me like a flash of lightning. This is another subtle but clear reference to the Alchymical Wedding of Christian Rosencreutz. Here are two sentences from the Fourth Day: "In the centre sat two young persons. [...]and over their heads hung a large and costly crown." I feel this is the answer to many questions about Ron and Hermione. The two young persons mentioned are decapitated along with four other kings and queens, and then reborn in the Tower of Olympus with the most excruciatingly beautiful new bodies. Decapitation might fill some of us with dread, but in alchemy decapitation means that the person's "old" head is replaced by a new head. In other words the person receives a new consciousness - a consciousness linked to the divine will. In the Bible the same story is told in the decapitation of John. Each one of us has within him John and Jesus. John is our old, mortal consciousness. This needs to be replaced by the consciousness of the Son of God. A few months ago there was a big debate in this group about whether Harry Potter is everyman or Christ. I say he is both! For every man can become a Christ-figure if he is willing to sacrifice his I-consciousness for the Christ-consciousness, which is potentially present. This is the new religion of the Age of Aquarius. Man will realise that everyone is called to become a Son of God through the self-sacrifice of the limited, earthly self, for the inner God Who lies dormant in each of us. He will obey the inner voice, as Harry always does, instead of obeying imposed authority, as people have done in past religions. The inner voice will lead us to the Inner God and we will die in Him, to be resurrected as the Son of the Original Spirit. If humanity realised the unimaginable splendour that God has intended for us, all wars and suffering would cease. And I'm sure this is the solution to RW/HG shippers. Sulfur and Mercury will blend and unite. Ron and Hermione will unite and become the new King and Queen as a result of the Alechemical Wedding. Someone recently (I think it was Mr Arrowsmith) asked in response to one of my posts, "Can't she (JKR) write her own story?" Well undoubtedly she can, but Harry Potter is not HER story. It's a story inspired by the Masters of Compassion who have the new consciousness, and with it, carry out God's plan for the redemption and liberation of humanity. Hans in Holland ________________________________________________________________________ Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE Yahoo! Messenger http://mail.messenger.yahoo.co.uk From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 10 14:23:43 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:23:43 -0000 Subject: Never tickle a sleeping dragon WAS: Caput Draconis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84482 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: Berit: > But the most > significant sign of Draco's change of attitude is the way he talks > about his father. In the previous books he has always referred to him > using the more formal "Father", but now he even calls him "Dad". Now, > that's significant if you ask me :-) > > My two knuts: Harry's in deep trouble. Draco dormiens nunquam > titillandus... Geoff: That's interesting. I hadn't noticed the use of "Dad" - it's right at the end of the line in my edition and I was following through the comment onto the next line. The strange thing is that he only does it once. He refers to "father" twice before in this scene. Curiously, just before DM's comment, Harry refers to "your dad" and I don't think (without ploughing through miles of canon) that he does that regularly. Looking at it personally, I always called my father "father" and it was only very much towards the end of his life when he began to use the short form of my name(!) that I switched to Dad. Something deeply psychological here. Pass Draco the nitroazepam somebody! From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Mon Nov 10 16:00:37 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:00:37 -0000 Subject: Another sleeping dragon?(Re: Never tickle a sleeping dragon ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84483 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > Geoff wrote: > > > One might also start drawing hints from the Hogwarts motto: Draco > > dormiens nunquam titillandus = "Never tickle a sleeping dragon". > > > > OK - now who's going to translate that as "Never tickle a sleeping > > Draco" and start a new Slytherin thread? > > :-) > > Me: > > I don't know if the topic is interesting enough to start a new > thread, but I would like to comment on the very interesting question > you raise about the Hogwarts motto. Because I have got a distinct > impression that is actually what Harry did at the end of > OoP, "tickled a sleeping Draco"... On pages 749-751 (British Version) > Harry bumps into Draco in the Entrance Hall. To me this little > incident describes a "new" Draco, a much more dangerous Draco. Up > till now Draco has just been "having fun" acting out the bad kid. > Harry landing his father in prison (and ridiculing him in front of > Draco) has however turned him into a potential Death Eater. Just read > those pages, and you see a Draco angrier than Harry had ever seen > him, his pale face "contorted with rage". And his voice is quiet, > whispering, no more of the loud, boisterous drawling. But the most > significant sign of Draco's change of attitude is the way he talks > about his father. In the previous books he has always referred to him > using the more formal "Father", but now he even calls him "Dad". Now, > that's significant if you ask me :-) > > My two knuts: Harry's in deep trouble. Draco dormiens nunquam > titillandus... > > Berit Now me: "Draco dormiens nunquam titilandus". By the way, Draco is not the only character we can tie up with the dragon. There's also his favourite teacher, Severus Snape. I remember that in Cos JKR wrote this: "Deliberately causing mayhem in Snape's Potions class was about as safe as poking a SLEEPING DRAGON in the eye." (Bloomsbury, p 142). It was in Book 2. In Book 4, we learned that dear Severus was formerly a Death Eater. We don't know how or why he decided to join Voldemort's gang. In Draco's case, the motivation is more obvious. Will Draco follow the example of his teacher? He has a good reason: Harry is his father's enemy. Or is Snape another "Draco dormiens", i.e, is he playing a double game? Will he turn out to be "a Devil's Snape", working for Voldemort in order to corner Harry and hand him over to the Dark Lord? What a bastard he would be Two knuts, amicalement, Iris From rredordead at aol.com Mon Nov 10 16:04:42 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:04:42 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84484 > Mandy: > > I concede the Malfoys are good looking. (You are absolutely right > > about beautiful Orlando Bloom and his blond, and pale pointy face, > Geoff again: > I hate to worry you but Orlando Bloom is actually very dark > haired..... so he's not a Malfoy. :-) Mandy again: No worries, I know the actor Orlando Bloom is dark in real life. Erin and I were debating whether a man described with a pale, pointy face could be though of a handsome. I though not, but Erin pointed out that Orlando Bloom as the elf Legolas in Lord of the Ring Trilogy is indeed extremely handsome and in doing so proved her argument. To me anyway. Mandy From annemehr at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 16:07:45 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:07:45 -0000 Subject: Never tickle a sleeping dragon WAS: Caput Draconis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84485 Berit wrote: > Harry bumps into Draco in the Entrance Hall. To me this little > incident describes a "new" Draco, a much more dangerous Draco. Up > till now Draco has just been "having fun" acting out the bad kid. > Harry landing his father in prison (and ridiculing him in front of > Draco) has however turned him into a potential Death Eater. Not to mention that Harry actually had very little to do with landing Lucius in Azkaban; as far as I see it, his only contribution was to tell Snape where he was going. It was really Dumbledore who got the DEs arrested. Did Harry accept the credit just for the fun of goading Draco further, or does he actually see his temporary success in the DoM battle as a real contribution? Even though I don't see how Harry could actually have reasoned with Draco, I'm not really sure why he said what he did. Berit, I agree with you. I think this is one of several actions of Harry's in OoP that are going to have really bad consequences. Another, of course, was giving Snape his first real reason to hate him by snooping in the pensieve. Harry's shifting the blame for Sirius' death onto Snape is a third. Granted, his need to shift some of the crushing guilt off himself (and deserved or not, he was feeling it) may have been almost a psychological necessity at the time. Still, I get the feeling it will turn out to have been much better had he followed Dumbledore's lead and blamed the headmaster. The huge new rift between Harry and Snape bodes no good, I'm sure. Harry has tickled the dragon. Of course, Harry's a bit of a dragon himself, and Lord Thingy and friends just can't seem to lay off the feather... Annemehr From rredordead at aol.com Mon Nov 10 16:46:50 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:46:50 -0000 Subject: Pure Blood Fertility / The 3 Black Sisters' Ages In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84486 Hi and welcome and this was a great post, not to long at all. Sorry I had to snip in places though. I wrote: > >The Black's and Malfoy's have united under the Malfoy > > name. Probably not something he imagined when he married the > > youngest of three sisters with two male cousins. -Lunatique wrote: > Actually I believe Narcissa was the eldest of the three sisters, > rather than the youngest. Snip Me again: Interesting. I place the Black sisters order as Bellatrix, Andromeda, Narcissa because that was the order in which they appeared on their branch of the family tree when you read left to right. Of course I haven't seen the tree in person (unless you count the one on the Lexicon) we only have Sirius reading it off to Harry. But I assumed he read the names left to right as his eyes scanned the tapestry. Could be wrong on this though. Lunatique wrote: > Reasoning: Sirius said he hadn't seen Bellatrix since he was Harry's own age, fifteen. which places her in seventh year when Sirius was in his fifth. Me again: Sirius walked out on his family at 15 so I assumed that was why he didn't see any of his extended family again. -Lunatique > So anyway, I'd place Tonks at about twenty. Me again: Yes I agree the Tonks being 20. The perfect age for Harry to crush on. A beautiful girl who does his dream job and works for the Order of the Phoenix? A fantasy for Harry if I ever read one. ;-) -Lunatique wrote: > That would make Andromeda 41/42--older than Bellatrix. With Andromeda as the middle sister, that automatically makes Narcissa the oldest. This might also make Narcissa older than her husband...but that's not exactly unheard of, is it? Mandy again: I place Bellatrix at 41 and with Lucius'in school. I assumed they were both one of the gang of Slytherin's who all turned out to be Death Eaters. Andromeda in the middle somewhere around 39 and Narcissa at about 36 which would have put her in James and Lily's year in school. I have no proof of this, just speculation. Lunatique wrote: having Narcissa as the eldest daughter makes her more attractive as Lucius Malfoy's choice of wife. If one goes with the reduced fertility theory, there probably weren't that many witches of lofty enough birth to suit him anyway. Me again: Hum, interesting. I agree in the eldest sibling being definitely the more attractive choice. Apologies to all younger siblings out there but in a family where bloodlines and money mean so much the bargaining power does lie in the eldest boy and/or girl. What if the Malfoy's wanted their son (Lucius) to marry the elder Black daughter, Bellatrix, but they were to late, or offered a less attractive deal than the Lestranges? The second child's a blood traitor, the only option left was the youngest Narcissa. Might explain her reluctance to having more children, being considered leftovers by here husband and his family. Ack, don't like my own argument here and I have to get back to work. Look forward to more discussionlater I hope. Welcome to HPfG. Mandy From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Nov 10 17:03:12 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:03:12 -0000 Subject: sexism in the WW (Was I know Molly.....) In-Reply-To: <00d101c3a77a$aafd94e0$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84487 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb" wrote: > Debbie: > > > I see this as an example of JKR having become more conscious of her own gender biases in writing characters. The first four novels had been criticized for their gender portrayals, most notably in a Salon article not long after GoF was published. In GoF, there is absolutely no mention that Alice was an Auror. >snip< > > In OoP, on the other hand, they were both described as Aurors. The difference is so striking, I'm left with the nagging feeling that Alice was promoted between books. Hickengruendler: Here I agree with you. That was the first what I thought when I read in OOTP that Alice was an Auror, too. But in a few other points, I disagree with you. > > Amelia Bones has the same position once held by Crouch Sr., but in her only scene, she allows Harry's hearing to be commandeered by Fudge in a dereliction of due process. Especially here: First off all, it was Amelia Bones only scene up until now, but I highly doubt it will remain her only scene. I don't know if you wanted to implie this, I just want to mention it. She has a very important office, especially considering what's to come, so I am sure this is not the last we saw of Amelia Bones. I saw the whole trial mainly as foreshadowing to other, way more important similar scenes. But more important: Fudge changed the law. There is nothing Amelia could do against this, and there is nothing Barty Crouch could have done against this. It is a sign that the Wizarding World is anything but a democracy, if Fudge can change the laws that easily, but I don't think you can blame Amelia Bones for it. Second, Crouch was a highly biased man, who threw people into Azkaban without a trial. Amelia Bones is a fair judge, who at once contradicted Fudge, when he said that Arabella Figg was an untrustworthy witness. It is not hard to judge, who is better, Bones or Crouch. >Thus, while she speaks her mind at the hearing, she appears ineffectual. She does not. If she were that ineffectual, the other Wizengamot members might have voted against Harry. Okay, this is speculation. But Bones has to be neutral. She can't tell the Wizengamot members that they have to vote for Harry. > > The other women we know that work for the MoM (Mafalda Hopkirk, Bertha Jorkins, Marietta's mother) don't appear to have high-ranking positions, and Marietta's mother, the our only WW example of mother with a paying job(Hermione's parents are muggles and don't count) fears for her position if her daughter was found to be associating with Harry Potter. About Mrs. Edgecombe: She might be the only working mother from the wizarding world we know. But how many mothers do we know, that stay at home? Molly Weasley and probably Narcissa Malfoy. If you don't count Hermione's mother, you also can't count Aunt Petunia. So I still say the verdict is open in this case. > >Morevover though I think JKR made a very specific effort in OOP to give McGonagall more spunk than she had in the past, her spunk manifests in catfights with other women professors, such as Trelawney and Umbridge, which is stereotypically female behavior. But the "catfight" with Trelawney was in PoA, way before Rowling was critized about her characterisation of the female characters and not in OOtP. So the spunk was really there all along. Also, I really see no difference, between, for example, McGonagall's snarkiness and Phineas Niggelus' (with the exception, that Phineas is a bit meaner than McGonagall). So I don't think it is stereotypially female. >Like Molly, McGonagall remains a shadowy figure as far as her contribution to the Order is concerned. More so than Remus Lupin or Mad-Eye Moody (not to mention Sirius, who was moody because of his uselessness)? I don't think so. Okay, they were around for the finale fight, but this was mainly by accident, because they were, when Snape alarmed Sirius. But otherwise we don't know what they have done all the year. > > JKR has clearly moved forward in this book, but I think she's subconsciously, perhaps, drawn too much on her own background and experience in drawing the characters and selecting their gender. I generally agree with you. There is still more that JKR can do, but I don't think it's that bad as it seemed to be in your post. *g* > Hickengruendler From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 10 17:04:14 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:04:14 -0000 Subject: Never tickle a sleeping dragon WAS: Caput Draconis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84488 Inge wrote: Harry is the one to actually want the > situation to develop. > Too bad Snape had to show up at the very moment Harry was ready to > use his wand. I'd love to see what would have happened if there had > been no interference from a teacher. Me: Yeah, you're right; Harry seems to at best not care whether he gets into a fight with Draco or not... I'm a bit surprised you find this exciting; I find it very scary... :-). I was quite happy Snape turned up right on time to prevent whatever would have happened! And hopefully Harry will deal with some of his feelings over the summer so he will become more mature, balanced and rational next time he needs to keep his head (and heart) cool and clear... Dumbledore and the "good side" don't need another revengeful and hate-driven Voldemort-type on their side. Another two knuts of mine .-) Berit From rredordead at aol.com Mon Nov 10 17:45:33 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:45:33 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84489 Hi Steve, I'm going to have to disagree on what makes `canon' and to address some of your post. I'd like to address you last comment first: Steve wrote: but honestly, it is extremely strong evidence indeed. Now me: Extremely strong evidence is not `Canon' in my opinion. I may be splitting hairs but when I use the Lexicon I assume that, unless otherwise stated, what I am reading is based directly from the books themselves. Movie contamination is sited and I think Lexicon contamination, or are Lexicon assumptions based on extremely strong evidence should be sited too. I have many times gone running back to my books to look up a page that has been quoted along with a statement, to find the statement is actually an assumption. I don't wish to discourage assumption but as a Lexicon is a dictionary shouldn't the results be drawn from events that have taken place? I will concede that a Lexicon is an ever-evolving entity, but when making guesses, even educated ones, where does one draw the line between assumption, theory and fiction? Steve wrote: > James is in Gryffindor. That's given in the book. It's on page 704 > of the US edition of OP. Ron rumples his hair and Harry grins > because it reminds him "forcibly of another Gryffindor Quidditch > player...", which is a reference to James's actions Harry witnessed > in Snape's memory. Now me: This could easily be a assumption made by Harry who of course wants his father to be in his house. Part of Harry's quest in the sage is him seeking to belong, searching for his parents and the family he's never had. Harry has never assumed James to be anything other than a Gryffindor. Steve wrote: > As for Lupin and Sirius, the conversation on page 170 (US) is the > most telling. Clearly from Sirius' comments, only one of the three > of them could have been made Prefect, and that one turned out to be > Lupin. If they were in different houses, Lupin's being made Prefect > wouldn't have precluded the others from getting a badge too. Now me: `Only one of them could have been made a prefect' is your assumption based on the conversation that took place between Sirius, Lupin, Harry, Tonks, and Ginny. What Sirius actually said was "No one would have made me a prefect, I spent too much time in detention with James. Lupin was the good boy, he got the badge." (Page 170 OotP US edition.) I understood that in reference to their ability, rather than the fact that only one from each house gets the badge. If Sirius and James new how bad they had been in school, they knew they were not even in the running. So even if they were in different houses, within their circle there was only one who could ever have go the badge. Lupin. All that being said, I do want to congratulate you on a wonderful job on collating and displaying the huge amounts of info in the Harry Potter series and hope you will continue to do so. As I will continue to use and enjoy the Lexicon. Your sincerely, Mandy From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Nov 10 17:59:20 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:59:20 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84490 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > > Steve wrote: > > James is in Gryffindor. That's given in the book. It's on page 704 > > of the US edition of OP. Ron rumples his hair and Harry grins > > because it reminds him "forcibly of another Gryffindor Quidditch > > player...", which is a reference to James's actions Harry witnessed > > in Snape's memory. > It was also confirmed in an interview by JKR, I think. She said that Harry's parents were in Gryffindor. Besides, if the Marauders had worn the school uniforms during her O.W.L. tests, Harry would have seen James' shawl. So it was probably more than assumption. > > Now me: > `Only one of them could have been made a prefect' is your assumption > based on the conversation that took place between Sirius, Lupin, > Harry, Tonks, and Ginny. What Sirius actually said was "No one would > have made me a prefect, I spent too much time in detention with > James. Lupin was the good boy, he got the badge." (Page 170 OotP US > edition.) That's right. But Sirius said "The" badge not "A" badge. Which highly indicates IMO, that he meant that there was only one badge for James, Sirius or Remus. Which means that they had to be in the same house. Hickengruendler From dwoodward at towson.edu Mon Nov 10 18:12:00 2003 From: dwoodward at towson.edu (Woodward, Deirdre) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 13:12:00 -0500 Subject: When did Harry enter the Wizarding World (Was Book One question) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84491 SNIPPAGE BELOW! > Tzvi: > > At what point does Harry enter the magical wold? . > > Tzvi of Brooklyn bboy_mn: It's impossible to get the right answer unless you ask the right question. When did Harry ENTER the wizard world? Answer; on the day he was born. A better question; when did Harry RE-enter the wizard world? In this case, I would say he re-entered the wizard world when he set foot into the Leaky Cauldron. END SNIPPAGE I agree wholeheartedly with bboy_mn's ENTER/REENTER comments. However, I believe Harry reentered the wizarding world when Hagrid tells him he is a wizard. >From that moment on, Harry's life as he understands it is fundamentally changed. Entering the Leaky Cauldron, or Diagon Alley, or even Hogwart's is only the physical representation of that fundamental altering of Harry's consciousness about who he is. I make this claim because as a reader, I had access to the wizard information about Harry long before Harry himself had it, but once Hagrid breached the seal, so to speak, with Harry, I was no more informed about the wizarding world than he, and I felt that from the dilapidated shack on the storm-rocked island, Harry and I marched forth into the wizarding world together. Hope that last part makes sense. Deirdre [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From erinellii at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 18:33:00 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:33:00 -0000 Subject: sexism in the WW In-Reply-To: <00d101c3a77a$aafd94e0$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84492 > --- Erin wrote: This is a society in which Alice Longbottom can be an auror... > Debbie: > I see this as an example of JKR having become more conscious of her own gender biases in writing characters. In GoF, there is absolutely no mention that Alice was an Auror. Crouch states that the Lestranges et al. were accused of "capturing an Auror -- Frank Longbottom -- and subjecting him to the Cruciatus Curse" and further accused "of using the Cruciatus Curse on Frank Longbottom's wife." In OoP, on the other hand, they were both described as Aurors. The difference is so striking, I'm left with the nagging feeling that Alice was promoted between books. Erin: All right, I take your point here, and I even agree with what you've said. But I also believe that what you're saying isn't really relevent to the point I was trying to make at all. IMO, once JKR has written something into the canon, the reasons *why* she has done it do not affect its presence there. Alice Longbottom IS an auror. Period. What we were trying to figure out in this thread was if the WW is sexist- not if JKR is. Debbie: > There are other ways in which the sexism of our own world has crept into the books regardless of JKR's intentions. While we are aware, mostly through historical details presented in the novels and in FBAWTFT, that there have been women in positions of power in the WW, the MoM characters that play a significant role in the story -- with the exception of Umbridge the villain (who I see as a bureaucratic functionary run amok) -- are male. Thus, while we know that Fudge's predecessor was female, we know nothing about her. Erin: I don't know that I see this as sexism in the WW. I see where it could be argued that it is sexism on JKR's part, by not giving women equal story time, but not on the part of the WW. Debbie: > Amelia Bones has the same position once held by Crouch Sr., but in her only scene, she allows Harry's hearing to be commandeered by Fudge in a dereliction of due process. It was her department, and I can't imagine that JKR would have let that happen if Crouch was still in charge. Thus, while she speaks her mind at the hearing, she appears ineffectual. Erin: We can't know exactly what constitutes due process in the WW. It may be that Fudge was well within his rights to preside over the hearing. It has already been remarked many times on this list that the WW seems to lack the system of checks and balances in government that we muggles take for granted. Also, I am not willing to crucify JKR over what you imagine she would or would not have done. You have no way of knowing how she would have chosen to write that scene had Crouch still been in charge. I could state that I think Crouch would have sided with Fudge and expelled Harry without any hearing at all, but that doesn't make it true. Debbie: Also, it is strongly implied that Amelia Bones is single. (If she is Susan Bones' aunt and she is married, by the WW conventions we see she would have a different last name.) In the WW, as well as here, it appears that women have a much more difficult time reaching the top of their professions if they must juggle work and family. Erin: Unless I'm missing a key piece of canon, I don't see this at all. I know Susan Bones tells Harry that Amelia Bones is her "auntie", but I don't recall her saying that Amelia was her mother's sister or her father's sister. So Amelia could very well be her aunt by marriage (wed to Susan's mother's or father's brother) and have a whole houseful of kids for all we know. Debbie: The other women we know that work for the MoM (Mafalda Hopkirk, Bertha Jorkins, Marietta's mother) don't appear to have high-ranking positions, and Marietta's mother, the our only WW example of mother with a paying job(Hermione's parents are muggles and don't count) fears for her position if her daughter was found to be associating with Harry Potter. Erin: I notice that, again, you didn't throw Tonks in there. I'd say auror is a pretty important job. And, ok, she's not married, but she is very young yet. I'm betting she gets some romance in before the end of the books. And I can't see her ever giving up her job as an auror regardless of who she marries- she's too well-suited for it. Also, Alice Longbottom is a WW example of a working mom. Debbie: > And while there are plenty of female professors (and former headmistresses) at Hogwarts, one of the qualifications for the job seems to be a lack of a spouse. Erin: So far, we haven't seen ANY Hogwarts professor with a spouse- male or female- so I fail to see how this is sexism. Also, there is a very specific reason for this- canon is not yet complete. JKR has said in various interviews that certain teachers ARE married, that Harry does not yet know about these marriages, and hinted that crucial plot developments hang upon the secret spouses. Debbie: Moreover, though I think JKR made a very specific effort in OOP to give McGonagall more spunk than she had in the past, her spunk manifests in catfights with other women professors, such as Trelawney and Umbridge, which is stereotypically female behavior. Like Molly, McGonagall remains a shadowy figure as far as her contribution to the Order is concerned. Erin: I think, that in calling McGonagall's struggles "catfights", we're seeing more sexism from you than from JKR. I didn't see them that way at all, I saw them as power struggles. Why is it that any time a woman disagrees with another woman, someone has to call it a catfight? Granted, McGonagall's cat animagus form probably lets her in for more of that than usual. But I see the Snape/Sirius feud as far more catfight-like overall, what with remarks about each other's physical appearence and having no real issues to speak of. An example of a catty remark is Lavender(or Pavarti, whichever) saying she'd be Umbridge's friend "as long as I don't have to borrow that cardigan." I don't see McGonagall saying anything like this to Umbridge's face, or behind her back. As far as the McGonagall-Trelawney feud, I read this as the same dynamic Spock and Dr. McCoy share in the original Star Trek. Spock/McGonagall's logical mind simply can't accept McCoy/Trelawney' "intuitions". Spock snipes at Dr. McCoy to humorous effect also, but I've never heard anyone call that a catfight. Erin From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Mon Nov 10 18:51:23 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:51:23 -0000 Subject: sexism in the WW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84493 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote: > Erin: > Unless I'm missing a key piece of canon, I don't see this at all. I > know Susan Bones tells Harry that Amelia Bones is her "auntie", but I > don't recall her saying that Amelia was her mother's sister or her > father's sister. So Amelia could very well be her aunt by marriage > (wed to Susan's mother's or father's brother) and have a whole > houseful of kids for all we know. No. When Moody showed Harry the picture of the old Order, he said that Edgar Bones was Amelia's brother and not brother in law. ut they still have both the name Bones. That measn either Amelia is unmarried or she decided to keep her family name after the wedding. Hickengruendler From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 18:08:22 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:08:22 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84494 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" > wrote: > > > > > Steve wrote: > > > James is in Gryffindor. That's given in the book. It's on page > 704 > > > of the US edition of OP. Ron rumples his hair and Harry grins > > > because it reminds him "forcibly of another Gryffindor Quidditch > > > player...", which is a reference to James's actions Harry > witnessed > > > in Snape's memory. > > > > It was also confirmed in an interview by JKR, I think. She said that > Harry's parents were in Gryffindor. Besides, if the Marauders had > worn the school uniforms during her O.W.L. tests, Harry would have > seen James' shawl. So it was probably more than assumption. Now me: I don't think JKR ever said James was in Gryffindor in an interview. The closest thing I can find is when she was asked "Whiat position did James play on the Gryffindor Quidditch team?" She responded, "James was a chaser." That is neither confirmation or denial of his house association. I also don't think students wear any house-specific markings on their uniforms. I believe this is movie-contamination. Is there canon to support a different unform and/or badge, etc. for each house? Not that I believe James was in a different house than Gryffindor, I just don't think it can be *proven* either way at this point. I noticed when I read the Lexicon that many things are presented as fact even though there is little evidence to support them. As many on this board (including me) do, we see the evidence in the light of whatever 'fact' we are trying to prove. -Hermowninny From nibleswik at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 18:10:03 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:10:03 -0000 Subject: Which house did Moaning Myrtle belong to? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84495 > I like to believe she was a Slytherin. Me: The basilisk only attacked mudbloods. Do you really think a mudblood was in Slytherin? Moreover, do you think Salazar Slytherin's creature would attack someone from his master's house? I don't see that at all. I don't think she can be a Slytherin. Erin: > This makes sense to me for two reasons. I know a lot of people think > of her as Hufflepuff from her appearence, and the fact that she was > picked on, but I think that her behavior after death negates that. > Namely, the way she haunted Olive Hornsby, the girl who had teased > her while she was alive. The absolute pleasure she takes in telling > Harry of her revenge definitely points towards her being placed in > Slytherin IMO. Me: I'll say it again. Mean behavior =/= automatic Slytherin. It really doesn't! I mean, of the "taunters" in HP, whose taunting made the biggest impression on you? For me, it was James, a Gryffindor. Slytherin is not the house of the mean! Cunning and ambition have absolutely nothing to do with teasing Olive Hornby. Furthermore, if she's just getting back at Olive for teasing her, that's just like Harry! Harry, Ron, and Hermione relish opportunities to make fun of Malfoy because of how he treats them. And they're all Gryffindors. Ron took "absolute pleasure" in recalling Malfoy's experience as a bouncing ferret. I don't believe Myrtle's behavior points toward her being in any particular house. Erin: > The second reason that if she were a Slytherin, she could be THE good > Slytherin that many people on this list believe in. THE good Slytherin? Well, I haven't been on this list for that long, so I may just have missed these discussions, but I believe there are many more than one good Slytherin. Just as in the RW, you're bound to notice the extremists of a given group more, I think the Slytherins JKR highlights are the wacky, ESE ones. That doesn't mean that they're all like that. And if there is only one good Slytherin, if there is THE good Slytherin, might I hazard a guess that said Slytherin would be Snape? Seeing as how he's good and all? Like I said, I really don't think Myrtle's a Slytherin. Erin: > We know (from a couple things JKR has said) that ghosts will figure > in book seven. I think Myrtle will be the main ghost character when > we get there. Lots of reasons for that. She's really quite > different from the other ghosts we've met in many ways. She's > younger, for instance. Both in years since she died, and her actual > age at time of death. She's a kid, like the trio and friends, and so > she really fits better into their world than any of the adult ghosts > do. > The other ghosts seem to have made peace with their existence, while > Myrtle is very unhappy about being dead. I think that if there is > going to be a ghost who gets to "move on" to the next plane of > existence, it will be Myrtle. Me: I completely agree with you there. I think those are great points, and I hadn't thought about it. Thank you for bringing that up. Erin: > Also, it seems suspicious to me that so many of the people who are > now at Hogwarts, namely Dumbledore, McGonagall, Hagrid, and Myrtle, > were all there when Tom Riddle was. Me: I don't think that suspicious at all, honestly. I mean, there are natural time progressions -- it's not suspicious if the student at a university in 2000 is a tenured professor there in 2040, or even if that's true of ten students. I imagine JKR arranged the timeline so LV's second coming would be aligned with a time when lots of his classmates and professors would be at Hogwarts. Why do you think it's suspicious? Cheekyweebisom From kkearney at students.miami.edu Mon Nov 10 19:15:47 2003 From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:15:47 -0000 Subject: Portrait-Person In-Reply-To: <20031110102726.29307.qmail@web40009.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84496 Catlady wrote: > In my opinion, the magical portrait is a NEW PERSON who began as > a copy of the model, with the personality traits and personal > memories you mentioned, but after that the portrait has its own life > experiences, no longer linked to the life experiences of the model. And Paula replied: > I just can't see it this way. I agree that the portrait would have its own life experiences, but they would have to be based on and added to the person's (models) memories, outlook, and mentality. I'd always imagined that this is why one portrait would be chosen over another to carry out a specific mission, as in real life. The portrait retains the personality, traits, and experiences of the person. Yes, the portraits experiences must be different from the model because the model is no longer in this world. But the portrait carries on as the person would have. << I think the portrait carries on as the person would have if the person were to have the same experiences as the portrait-person. It is sort of like starting a parallel dimension for that person. Both the portrait-person and the original person begin exactly the same, with the same memories, outlook, and mentality, as Paula stated. However, from that point on, the experiences of the two are going to be at least slightly different. It seems illogical to expect the two to develop and learn in exactly the same manner. If I were to move to a new place, get a new job, and be surrounded by new people tomorrow, I can guarantee I'd be different in a few years than if I were to stay here. Maybe not in any extremely noticable way, but maybe so. Same basis, same person, but different development. Catlady: > I suppose that the spell for a later portrait is somewhat different than the spell for a first portrait, ...I suppose that the creation of a later portrait updates the model's-memories... Paula: > Where is there any canon for this? I can't recall any canon that specifically explains the process and/or spells that an artist used to paint a portrait. That's why I think that the portrait is simply a vehicle for the departed to continue to function in this world. My personal belief is that the original portrait-person's memories remain intact despite new paintings being created. The new painting simply adds a new wing to the portrait-person's "home". No canon to support this idea, of course, but then none to contradict it either. Catlady: > But I firmly believe there is no telepathic link between the > portrait-person and model-person after the painting is completed. > Can I make an analogy of a xerox of a laser-printed document? The > two copies start out the same but go on to separate lives. Paula: > OK, there's something to this analogy. But IMHO, the WW is much more complicated and sophisticated than photocopying. Afterall, a portrait is a copy of one who was alive and functional in this world. Printed matter was never alive or capable of function on its own. It's just passively absorbed. So it's a very complex photocopier. :) Besides, we've seen that printed matter IS capable of functioning on its own in the Wizarding World (Riddle's diary, the Marauder's Map). When it comes to papers and pictures gaining conciousness, I don't think we should underestimate the possibilities. -Corinth From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 19:25:27 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:25:27 -0000 Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint by having him not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84497 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nibleswik" > > wrote: > > > > It seems to me that there must be something else going on here. > > What could make Snape favor the child of a DE? > > Entropy: > > This may all be part of Snape's spying game. If he really does have > to play "Malfoy's lapdog", as Sirius says, then it would be > beneficial for him to get in good with Lucius's son, as well. > > ...edited... > > Besides, if Snape is so skilled at occlumency and legilimency, it's > a good bet that Malfoy may be as well .... So, the more "good" > memories Snape can create for himself regarding Draco, and the more > "bad" memories he can create of Harry, the better it will be for him > if anyone ever tries to crack into that cobwebby brain of his. > > :: Entropy :: bboy_mn: I like this last part. Even if Snape's true feelings don't reflect his actions, he is able to keep those true feelings masked by flooding his mind and therefore his memory with images that are counter to those feelings. He favors Draco and despises Harry which are exactly the types of images and feelings Voldemort would expect if he probed Snape's mind. Seeing what he expects to see, Voldemort would be unlikely to probe further unless some specific suspicious incident prompted it. Seems like the perfect cover. On the other hand, I don't think Snape's natural feelings and attitudes are that far out of line with Voldemorts. Snape probably does see pure-blood wizards as superior to others. He just doesn't agree with Voldemort's methods or ultimate goals. We all know that Voldemort has no true allegiance to pure-blood wizards any more than Saddam Hussein has true allegiance to Islam and it's principles. This 'purity of blood' philosophy is just a mean that he uses to rally support, and control the masses. In the end, no more than Saddam, he will always act in his own best interests, and will ruthlessly seize, use and abuse power to his own benefit without regard for whether it serves the cause of 'purity of blood'. Like all good ruthless dictators, he knows what the people need; and that is, someone to blame and something to believe; a rallying point. So, my point is that I can see Snape and Lucius as being kindred spirits; sharing common beliefs and attitudes. The difference is that Snape has realize that turning the wizard world over to a mad, deranged, self-absorbed, power hungry, psychotic, megalomaniac in not necessarily a good thing. The reason Lucius can't see this is because he is blinded by the wealth, power, and status he thinks being in Voldemort's top echelon will bring him. Sadly, once Voldemort is in power, and Lucius discovers that his life of priviledge is really the priviledge to be tortured by Voldemort on a whim, and spending the rest of his life kiss the scalely backide of a dictator while the wizard world and it's economy deteriorate into the worst depression in wizarding history, it will be too late to do anything about it. The one lesson dictators through out history have failed to learn is that tyanny and oppression are never prosperous. I find Snape and Lucius's friendship very believable. They share a common theoretical philosophy, but the differ in applied philosophy. Just a thought. bboy_mn From jjpandy at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 18:39:43 2003 From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 18:39:43 -0000 Subject: Questions to ponder Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84498 There are many kinds of people in this world: those who do not care about Harry Potter, those who are entertained by Harry Potter, and those who live and breathe Harry Potter! I said "many kinds" instead of "three kinds" because I welcome addition to this list! I am somewhere in transistion between the second and the third! I am in awe of the intellect and writing skills of many members of this group! My friends and I have focused on characters, plot, and movie comparisons and not so much on broad philosophical topics such as women's roles in society and the enslavemnt of the house-elves. Two questions to ponder for fun: (One)What do you think Dudley heard when the dementors came after him at the beginning of OotP? and (Two) How did other muggle-born wizards learn where to buy their school supplies and how to get onto Platform 9 and 3/4 once they received their Hogwarts' letters? Harry would not have known how to do any of this without Hagrid or the chance meeting with the Weasley family. How did Hermione or Colin Creevey manage? -JJPandy From nibleswik at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 19:15:46 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:15:46 -0000 Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint by having him not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84499 > 3) Snape knows that Draco despises Harry and that might be one > obvious reason Snape favors Draco. My point, though, is that if Snape has to choose between hating James Potter's kid and hating Lucius Malfoy's, he'd choose Malfoy's. Even if Snape hates Harry, he shouldn't favor Draco for hating Harry when he should see Draco as worse. Cheekyweebisom From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 10 16:49:24 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:49:24 -0000 Subject: Never tickle a sleeping dragon WAS: Caput Draconis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84500 Annemehr wrote: > Not to mention that Harry actually had very little to do with landing > Lucius in Azkaban; as far as I see it, his only contribution was to > tell Snape where he was going. It was really Dumbledore who got the > DEs arrested. Did Harry accept the credit just for the fun of goading > Draco further, or does he actually see his temporary success in the > DoM battle as a real contribution? Me: Good points Annemehr! But stretching it a bit I think Draco was right in assuming it was Harry who had landed his father in prison. If Harry hadn't insisted on going to the MoM in the first place, no one would have gone looking for either him or the DE's that were waiting for him there, would they... But otherwise I agree with you; Draco has singled out Harry as the one to blame, just like Harry has singled out Snape. And in both cases the blame should be placed elsewhere; with Harry and DD on one hand and with Lucius himself on the other hand for getting into such a sticky situation. Berit From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 20:10:30 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:10:30 -0000 Subject: When did Harry enter the Wizarding World (Was Book One question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84501 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Woodward, Deirdre" wrote: > SNIPPAGE BELOW! > > > Tzvi: > > > > At what point does Harry enter the magical wold? . > > > > Tzvi of Brooklyn > > bboy_mn: > > It's impossible to get the right answer unless you ask the right > question. When did Harry ENTER the wizard world? Answer; on the day > he was born. A better question; when did Harry RE-enter the wizard > world? In this case, I would say he re-entered the wizard world when > he set foot into the Leaky Cauldron. > > END SNIPPAGE > > Deirdre: > > ... However, I believe Harry reentered the wizarding world when Hagrid tells him he is a wizard. > > From that moment on, Harry's life as he understands it is > fundamentally changed. ...edited... > > ...edtied... he, and I felt that from the dilapidated shack on the > storm-rocked island, Harry and I marched forth into the wizarding > world together. > > Hope that last part makes sense. > > Deirdre bboy_mn: I very much see your position for a philisophical perspective, but from the point of view of logistics and the more physical plane, I still hold with the Leaky Cauldron. Just one itsy-bitsy teeny-tiny nit to pick. Relating our philisophical vs physical entrance into the wizard world, one could say that Harry re-became a wizard in an act of enlightenment; the realization 'dawned' on him. I say 'dawned' because if was a building growing process, and not the click of a light switch. True Harry's mind begins to open when Hagrid says, "...Harry -- yer a wizard". But a lot of doubt and discussion occur after that point. However, I think Harry sees 'the full light of day' in the course of this exchange... "..." said Uncle Vernon, "(we) swore we'd stamp it out of him. Wizard indeed." "You knew?" said Hary. "You knew I'm a -- a wizard?" "Knew!" sherieked Aunt Petunia suddenly. "Knew! Of course we knew! How could you not be...". At this point, there can be NO DOUBT in Harry's mind. If the ever so conservative, always ordinary Dusleys are saying it, confirming something so out of character for them, Harry can no longer have any doubt that he is indeed a wizard. I think that exhange is the transition into a new reality for Harry. Now the only thing to debate is whether that abstact realization constitutes entrance into the wizard world. I see it as a realization of himself, but he has yet to realize the existance of the wizard world itself. That's why I put it at the Leaky Caulron. Because that is when he truly comes face-to-face with living wizards and witches in the domain of their secret society. In the hut by the sea, he gains a realization of himself, in the Leaky Cauldron he gains a realization of a greater world at large. Not saying you are wrong, in fact, I agree whole heartedly that Harry's internal realization occurs at that time and place, but his greater external realization occur when he enters a world bigger than himself. Just a thought. bboy_mn From tminton at deckerjones.com Mon Nov 10 20:13:51 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:13:51 -0600 Subject: Snape Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE462611@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84502 Knowing now that Snape is a good guy playing double agent. What house do you think he was in?? Tonya [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 19:39:59 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:39:59 -0000 Subject: Was Quirrell a victim? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84503 "Jennifer" wrote: > After reading the first book...again...I started to think about if > Quirrell was a victim or a knowledgable co-conspiritor? Did LV take > him over because he was going to be the DADA the first year that HP > was going to be at Hogwarts and knew that HP could easily be killed > or was Quirrell a DE and let his master take over him so he could do > the same? It all depends if Quirrell was a DE or some poor guy in > the wrong place at the wrong time. I don't think that Quirrell was a Death Eater. Voldemort says in GoF that he found Quirrell wandering in a forest in Albania three or four years earlier and describes him as "young, foolish, and gullible. . . easy to bend to my will" (GOF p. 654, American edition). He wasn't yet evil, only weak, and he remains weak, begging his "master" to have mercy in SS, allowing Voldemort to take possession of his head (ugh). He seems to have retained some sense of his separateness from Voldemort, more so than he would under an Imperius curse, for example, and I for one think that the stuttering is an act that he came up with more or less on his own, along with the vampire story and garlic inside the turban. In other words, he is Voldemort's servant rather than his slave. He is acting at least partly of his own volition. At the end, though, he seems to have become wholly evil. Possibly he thinks that the sorceror's stone will give him as well as Voldemort immortality. He certainly has no inkling of what's coming to him. Jen again: > But who did suspect him? Snape, a past death eater. Snape could have known about Quirrell and his history as a DE, that is why he kept his watch and knew to check the Stone while everyone was after the troll. > > jen I think Snape suspects Quirrell because he knows how Dark Wizards think and he sees through Quirrell's explanations for the newly acquired timidity (encounter with a vampire) and turban (a garlic holder) in part because of his skill at Legilimency and in part through natural shrewdness and a keen intellect. In any case, I would guess that Quirrell taught at Hogwarts the previous year and that Snape would already have had his eye on him simply because he was the DADA teacher, a post that he resents Quirrell for holding. He would have been instantly suspicious of anything suggesting disguise or concealment. As an aside, I predict that in the seventh book Snape will prove his loyalty to Hogwarts and Dumbledore so convincingly that not even Harry can doubt him and will be rewarded with the DADA class at long last. I just realized that I haven't answered the question about whether Quirrell is a victim or a knowledgeable co-conspirator. I think he's both. A victim, after all, isn't necessarily innocent. In this case, Quirrell begins as a weak and gullible prospective victim who didn't practice constant vigilance. I would guess that Barty Crouch Jr. and Regulus Black began their DE careers in much the same way, and that Quirrell was reserved for a different fate only because he was still a child when LV was recruiting his Death Eaters. Carol From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Mon Nov 10 20:18:13 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:18:13 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] re: Subject: Book 1 question Message-ID: <14f.265938dc.2ce14c85@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84504 Tvzi, I am not going to go on one of my normal diatribes of what I think of your instructor. However, I will say this: IMHO, Harry never left the magical world. Although he was not in Hogwarts or Diagon Alley growing up, he was protected by magic-- the magic of his mother's blood. Number 4 Privet drive is protected by magic, thus to some extent it could be considered a magical house. Furthermore, we see in the books that wizards and witches live all over the place... not just Hogsmeade which is, as we know an entirely wizarding community. But, even the Burrow is in a normal village. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 20:18:33 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:18:33 -0000 Subject: More on Molly In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84505 > "artcase" wrote: > > > If Molly is the "anti-Aunt Petunia" then why does Aunt Petunia > > represent a stay at home mom as well? > > Because she has to, or the whole blood-protection system wouldn't > work. As we've seen in OoP, Harry has to be in the house to actually > be protected. And that is most probably because the house is where > Aunt Petunia is spending most of her time. > So I guess when DD gave Harry to the Dursleys, he first made sure > Petunia would actually be around. I can't see that as being a condition for the spell. Remember in order for the spell to continue to work, Harry has to go home every summer. His home has to be with his blood relative, Petunia. If the spell, can allow Harry to spend 9 months away at school and 3 months at home, then I don't see why Petunia couldn't leave the house to work full or part-time. I think Petunia doesn't work, because she and Vernon both want her to be a stay at home mom. Look at the image, they want to portray. Vernon wants everyone to think that he's successful. In Vernon's way of thinking, I'm sure that includes supporting a family without his wife's paycheck. That said. I don't have a problem with Petunia being a stay at home Mom or Molly either for that matter. Yolanda From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 20:17:41 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:17:41 -0000 Subject: Never tickle a sleeping dragon WAS: Caput Draconis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84506 Berit wrote: Draco has singled out Harry as the one to blame, just like Harry has singled out Snape. And in both cases the blame should be placed elsewhere; with Harry and DD on one hand and with Lucius himself on the other hand for getting into such a sticky situation. Now me: I don't see two hands here. What about *personal responsibility*? If you don't want to get arrested, don't do anything illegal! The blame lies solely on Lucius for his willing involvement in illegal activities. Just my humble opinion Hermowninny From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 20:12:38 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:12:38 -0000 Subject: Speaking up for Petunia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84507 > oiboyz: > That's an interesting theory, and I think it fits Petunia's and > Dudley's personalities very well (not to mention that it would be > too cool if Dudley turned out to be a wizard too...) I don't want Dudley to have magical powers. He beats smaller kids up. We don't want him running around hexing and cursing people. We already have Draco, Crabbe, Goyle, Pansy, etc. We have plenty of evil adolescents with wands. We do not need more. > I can't agree with it, only because I can't picture Dumbledore > agreeing to deny any child (even a Dursley child) his birthright of > magic. If the magic talent was in Petunia, and she herself begged > not to go to Hogwarts, that would be a different matter... Same here I don't think he would either. In fact, it may not be legal to deny muggleborns their magic. Yolanda From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 20:03:40 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:03:40 -0000 Subject: What to do about Sirius's mother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84508 > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "moorequests" > > wrote: > > > Enclosing the potrait in a wooden cupboard with a door, > latching the door from the outside, and putting an impeturbable > charm upon it. > June > Take a. one large can of paint, > take b. one paint roller. Apply ingredient a. > to the picture while using tool b. Presto - bye bye Mrs Black. > > Laura: > > I like June's idea but I'd take it a step farther. Use a paint > scraper-and make Kreacher do it. "La vengeance est un plat qui se > mange froid." (Revenge is a dish served cold.) He'd never do it. Only members of the Black family can order him around and I don't think he'd do it even then. As we've seen Kreacher is insane enough to ignore whatever makes houseelves obey their masters. He should have obeyed and looked after Sirius, blood traitor or not, but we all know what happened. Also, I'd guess that anyone who'd put a permanent sticking charm on the back of the painting protected the front as well. Nice idea though. I personally would love for Hermione, the muggleborn, to do it. Mrs. Black would hate that. I'm sure Professor Dumbledore would let Hermione borrow the ear muffs they used to repot mandrakes for such a worthy task. I think the cabinet idea would be best that or knocking the wall down from the opposite side). Reductor! Other options would be to wall over her portrait or magically whisk the whole wall away. Yolanda From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 19:46:41 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:46:41 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black and Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84509 > Tonya wrote: > > > Are we in agreement that Sirius Black was in Slytherin house?? > > :: Entropy :: wrote: > > The Lexicon has Sirius listed as a Gryffindor: > > Now me (Mandy): > The Lexicon is a very good reference however lately they have been > taking liberties with the 'canon'. > > The comment quoted above about Sirius' house is not canon as far as I > can tell. I have searched the books and if anyone has a page > reference please let me know. Usually the Lexicon will quote page > references, which is why I'm inclined to believe contamination. > > Personally I place Sirius in Slytherin because it is more interesting > to me to imagine his character having to struggle against the > influence of the rest of the Slytherin members as well as against his > family. The Lexicon also takes information from JKR's interviews. However, they usually specify when they do so. I always pictured all four Marauders as being in the same house. They were close friends who hung out together and caused trouble by playing pranks. They also did things like create the "Marauder's Map" and studied to become animagus. Although it's not impossible that they were in different houses, I would think they would need to spend a lot of time together to accomplish all of that. We are limited by Harry's POV, but in current day Hogwarts, we have not really seen students from other houses mingling and hanging out together? Remember when all the clubs, including the DA, were disbanded that Ginny had to go stop Michael, a Ravenclaw, from coming over to the Gryffindor table. A remark was made to the effect that people going over to another house's table would be very obvious. Ginny could stop Michael without attracting too much attention of course, because they were dating. People do date students in other houses (Ginny/Michael, Percy/Penelope), but that's dating so the rules for that may be a bit different. The DA also may have been an exception. I believe a comment was made about that as well, but I can't remember and I don't have my books with me. The comment may have been Harry's surprise at how many people showed up, not necessarily how many houses were represented. My apologies if I'm mistaken. Anyway, the students live with, eat, and take most of their classes with their housemates. Your closest friends will almost by default be your housemates do simply to the amount of time you spend together. Yolanda From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 20:25:37 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:25:37 -0000 Subject: Medieval Armor in Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84510 o_caipora" wrote: > Coming back to Gryffindor's sword, it may be the only sword we're > told about, but there's no shortage of suits of armor. IIRC there's > one in the corridor where the Room of Requirement appears, and kids > are always hiding behind them or stumbling into them in the dark. The > HP lexicon lists quite a few sets, and even a "long gallery full of > suits of armor." > > They could be hunting trophies, remembrances of Muggles who attacked > wizards. Else they're wizard armor. Armor against magic is bizarre. > Amulets, yes. Charms. Voldemort conjures up a magic shield. But not > armor. Regarding Gryffindor's sword, I think it may be the weapon Harry will use against LV in Book 7 since they can't duel with "brother" wands and I can't see JKR allowing her young hero to win the battle against evil with an illegal curse. But it seems like a strange possession for Godric Gryffindor unless he occasionally passed as a muggle and fought in their wars. The suits of armor also seem odd now that you mention it (though the absence of weapons to go with them doesn't, considering that Hogwarts is a school). But what about the portrait of Sir Cadogan? Surely he was a wizard--if not, what is his portrait doing in Hogwarts? Or maybe the paintings, which include one of a group of monks, are enchanted muggle artifacts? Monkhood and wizardry don't seem to go together. The same could apply to the suits of armor: neither wizard armor nor battle trophies, just medieval relics under some sort of animating charm. But that can't be the case for Gryffindor's sword, which seems to be a real weapon. So I'm right back where I started. Unconfuse me, somebody. Carol From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Mon Nov 10 20:34:52 2003 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:34:52 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84511 This may be a bit OT but I was wondering - what if..... What if you all could attend a press-meeting with Rowling right now - and you were allowed to ask her just one single question about the books (the 5 already out - or the 2 to come) - what would you ask her? I think it might be quite fun to make a list of questions for her (I know she'll never see them) to find out the variaty of questions that each of you are dying to ask if you got the chance - knowing that she'd give you the answer. It's not easy to pick just 1 question - but let me be the one to start by saying: 1) How is Peter Pettigrew going to repay his dept to Harry for saving his life? Please, make the list longer :-) Inge From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Mon Nov 10 20:47:00 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:47:00 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84512 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > What if you all could attend a press-meeting with Rowling right now - and you were allowed to ask her just one single question about the books (the 5 already out - or the 2 to come) - what would you ask her? >1) How is Peter Pettigrew going to repay his dept to Harry for saving his life? Arya Now: I'd like to see your #1 change to more general a question such as "Where was PEter in OotP and is he still around to repay his debt to Harry?" 2) Explain the Prefect and HeadBoy/Girl thing at Hogwarts. (Frankly, I wish a lot more of the questions asked to her were less specific such as this--not a specific yes/no question but just asking for an explanation. On a related note...does anyone know how those scholastic and AOL chats that have happened in the past get arranged? Are there any planned or in the works to deal with post-OotP questions? Is there anyway we canhelp petition for one of these? Arya From amani at charter.net Mon Nov 10 20:54:12 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:54:12 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ask the Question References: Message-ID: <007501c3a7cc$cbdaffc0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84513 Inge: > What if you all could attend a press-meeting with Rowling right now - and you were allowed to ask her just one single question about the books (the 5 already out - or the 2 to come) - what would you ask her? >1) How is Peter Pettigrew going to repay his dept to Harry for saving his life? Arya: 2) Explain the Prefect and HeadBoy/Girl thing at Hogwarts. (Frankly, I wish a lot more of the questions asked to her were less specific such as this--not a specific yes/no question but just asking for an explanation. Taryn: 3) What House(s) were MWPP in? ---------- Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Nov 10 20:59:08 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:59:08 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Which house did Moaning Myrtle belong to? Message-ID: <74.35190f55.2ce1561c@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84514 In a message dated 11/10/2003 1:20:17 AM Eastern Standard Time, erinellii at yahoo.com writes: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, newyorkcutie200 at a... wrote: I have read in a past post that JK Rowling was trying to hide something in the COS that would have gave away too much for future books. Could Moaning > Myrtle's house be important for books 6 and 7? Does anyone have any theories? Or is this just a stupid idea? > "newyorkcutie" Erin: I like to believe she was a Slytherin. This makes sense to me for two reasons. I know a lot of people think of her as Hufflepuff from her appearence, and the fact that she was picked on, but I think that her behavior after death negates that. Namely, the way she haunted Olive Hornsby, the girl who had teased her while she was alive. The absolute pleasure she takes in telling Harry of her revenge definitely points towards her being placed in Slytherin IMO. ---------- Sherrie, from the corner: Except that Myrtle was ineligible for House Slytherin - being a Mudblood and all... Personally, I think she was a Ravenclaw - maybe it's the glasses. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 10 20:59:35 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:59:35 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84515 Inge asked: > What if you all could attend a press-meeting with Rowling right >now - and you were allowed to ask her just one single question about >the books (the 5 already out - or the 2 to come) - what would you >ask her? > > It's not easy to pick just 1 question - but let me be the one to > start by saying: > 1) How is Peter Pettigrew going to repay his dept to Harry for > saving his life? Now me: I think my question would have to be: "Will Harry be alive & well at the end of book 7?" Alternatively, just to get people to *stop* hashing this one out, I'd ask her, "Is Sirius dead as a doornail, NEVER to return in ANY form?" [*I* am convinced the answer is "yes", so I wouldn't really waste my one question on this, but that's just me.] Siriusly Snapey Susan From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 10 21:02:11 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:02:11 -0000 Subject: Never tickle a sleeping dragon WAS: Caput Draconis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84516 Hermowninny wrote: > I don't see two hands here. What about *personal responsibility*? > If you don't want to get arrested, don't do anything illegal! The > blame lies solely on Lucius for his willing involvement in illegal > activities. Me: Sorry for not being clear, but that is what I was saying too :-) The only one responsible for Lucius's prison sentence is himself, and the one responsible for Sirius's death is not Snape, but Harry (and to some extent Dumbledore since he didn't fill him in). Berit From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 20:28:50 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:28:50 -0000 Subject: Speaking up for Petunia In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84517 Susan wrote: > Second, the Dursleys ARE absolutely terrified and ashamed of their > wizarding relatives. And, then let's review what's happened..there's > the incident with Dudley and the snake, Hagrid arrives and gives > Dudley a pig's tail, their business associates have cake dumped on > them...Aunt Marge is blown up.....Arthur blows their fireplace into > their living room, and then Dudley's tongue swells to gargantuan > size..then Dudley is attacked by Dementors...what have I missed? > > On the one hand, people who abuse kids deserve what they get, and I > can't get too upset about what happens to bullies..... > Susan McGee Actually, they've been horrible to Harry from the start and that was well before the above mentioned incidents. (I believe their memories of the Aunt Marge incident were erased, by the way.) To be fair, we know there were other incidents. The sweater that shrunk so Harry wouldn't have to wear it and Harry's hair growing back over night to fix a bad haircut are two examples but none of the Dursleys were harmed by any of that. Look at the treatment Harry received. They locked him in a cupboard under the stairs and treated the boy like a servant. The adults let Dudley and his friends bully Harry with immunity. "Harry Hunting", where Dudley and his friends hunt down, then beat up Harry, tells us as much. Worse they even encouraged it. Vernon told Dudley "Hit him with your smelting stick" when Harry didn't want to go fetch the mail. I understand the arguments that were made about caring for two toddlers and the fact that Petunia put herself and her family in danger when she took Harry in. I still find her treatment of him inexcusable. As an Aunt who has taken care of toddlers, all day long in some cases, I completly understand what a handful they are. Despite that, I still think the Dursley's are horrible. Yes, Petunia did the right thing for once, by taking Harry in, of course she may have been "convinced" to do so. We don't know yet. It just doesn't seem in character for her so far to care about anyone, but herself, her son, and her spouse. I don't see why she couldn't just be nice to him. Oh, by the way, since there was a good chance that Harry would grow up to be a wizard, I personally wouldn't have abused him for years. Yolanda From nibleswik at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 20:32:40 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:32:40 -0000 Subject: Of course Snape is a Slytherin, was: Re: Snape In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE462611@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84518 > Knowing now that Snape is a good guy playing double agent. What house > do you think he was in?? Slytherin, obviously. I'll say it AGAIN: Slytherin =/= evil. If all Slytherins were evil, do you really think the house would still exist? I mean, DD was planning on getting rid of Divination, a subject he thought to be useless but harmless. Do you really think he'd be all happy-bouncy to have a house that produced only ESE wizards? Snape was teased because he was a Slytherin, because he was interested in the Dark Arts. He was therefore seen as bad. Snape was a DE. Now he's a good guy. I may be misunderstanding you, but the implication of your statement seems to be, "Snape's good, so he couldn't possibly have been a Slytherin." That is simply wrong. Furthermore, I'm pretty sure the head of each house was in said house. Moreover, Snape is both cunning and ambitious. What does the Sorting Hat sing? Does it sing, "Slytherin's the house for all the good-for-nothing bastards who will ruin life as we know it", or does it sing, "For instance, Slytherin / Took only pure-blood wizards / Of great cunning, just like him" (OotP, p. 205)? Yes, it is the second. Slytherins are supposed to be cunning, ambitious purebloods. The three traits don't automatically spell out evilness. Cheekyweebisom From lb140900 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 20:40:23 2003 From: lb140900 at yahoo.com (Louis Badalament) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:40:23 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84519 My Question; Has Harry now become as close a friend with Neville, Luna, and Ginny as he is with Hermione and Ron? Which is to say, will we see these three also trailing around with him wherever he goes? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 20:42:54 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:42:54 -0000 Subject: Wormtail's silver hand (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84520 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Diana_Sirius_fan" wrote: > > A related question regarding Sirius's schoolboy "prank": If Snape > were > > a vampire, couldn't he have fought werewolf Lupin in that form? If > > we're going by folklore, nothing can kill a vampire but a stake of > > holly to the heart, right? Why would he have needed to learn > > occlumency or any form of defense against the dark arts if he were > > virtually immortal? > > > > Carol > > > Snape may not have had to learn occumlency. If he is a vampire, he > may be able to read minds already, so he fine tuned this skill. As > far as learning the dark arts: he was always interested in that > subject. Just because he could be immortal doesn't mean he can not > be interested in a subject. At Hogwarts, all students must take > DADA, even if they are a vampire. Even so, JK's vampire might not be > a traditional folklore vampire. > > Diana But Snape would not have been furious with Sirius all these years for apparently trying to kill him if he were a vampire because he would not have been in any danger from werewolf Lupin. Also Dumbledore would never have hired him and the students wouldn't be safe. Snape took his DADA O.W.L. exam very seriously, writing about two feet more than anyone else in a tiny hand and poring over the questions after the answers had been turned in. It was clearly of the utmost importance to him (as the closest he could get to the dark arts themselves)--it was not merely a required subject. If he were a vampire, he'd have no need for the dark arts if he wanted to harm an enemy. All he would have to do is bite them. There is no solid evidence that he's a vampire, only an occasional suggestive image (and Sirius has the same traits, overtly described as vampirelike in his case). And I can't think of any plot-related reason why he would need to be one (other than as an ambassador to the vampires, and we've already had that sort of subplot with Hagrid). Snape is pretty clearly a "pure blood" wizard, based on his reference to Lily as a "mudblood" and his aversion to werewolf Lupin (as well as his placement in Slytherin, if the sorting hat follows Salazar Slytherin's criterion for admission to his house). I don't mean to be rude or dismissive, but I don't understand why anyone would want him to be a vampire. What is the attraction of this theory? Carol From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Nov 10 21:07:15 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:07:15 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Which house did Moaning Myrtle belong to? Message-ID: <14e.2650abca.2ce15803@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84521 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, newyorkcutie200 at a... wrote: > Fifty years ago, Hogwarts students had different uniforms, and they wore > a pin to show what house they belonged to. For example in the COS movie, you > can clearly see Tom Riddle's pin that shows he belongs to Slytherin. =================== Sherrie, over in the corner, glancing up from Tennessee Williams: The books don't really describe the uniforms, present or past, except that they're "plain working robes". We assume somehow that there's a House distinction - badge or whatever - because Harry is able to identify students' House afffiliation at a distance in the books. However, the House badge concept most of us have (and I'm as guilty as any!) is movie contamination. That said - the pin that YTR wears in the film isn't a House badge - it's his Prefect badge. It's green and silver because he's a Slytherin Prefect, but not every Slytherin wears one. Sherrie (crawling back into CAT ON A HOT TIN ROOF before auditions) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From erinellii at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 21:09:08 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:09:08 -0000 Subject: Which house did Moaning Myrtle belong to? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84522 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, wrote: > Erin: > > I like to believe she was a Slytherin. > > nibleswik": > The basilisk only attacked mudbloods. Do you really think a mudblood was in Slytherin? Erin: Well, Tom Riddle, a halfblood, was. But I don't actually think that the Basalisk attacked "only" mudbloods. I mean, it attacked a *cat*, for gosh sakes. And I don't think Myrtle was attacked because she was a mudblood. nibleswik": Moreover, do you think Salazar Slytherin's creature would attack someone from his master's house? I don't see that at all. I don't think she can be a Slytherin. Erin: I think she was attacked not because of *who* she was, but more because she was in the wrong place at the wrong time. She was in the bathroom when Tom released the snake. She actually heard his voice. He must have feared that she'd be able to identify him. So she had to die. Or it could even have been accidental, like he didn't know she was there, she just opened the stall door, and BAM! there were the basalisk eyes and she was dead. > > Erin: Namely, the way she haunted Olive Hornsby, the girl who had teased her while she was alive. The absolute pleasure she takes in > telling Harry of her revenge definitely points towards her being placed in Slytherin IMO. > nibleswik: > I'll say it again. Mean behavior =/= automatic Slytherin. It really > doesn't! I mean, of the "taunters" in HP, whose taunting made the > biggest impression on you? For me, it was James, a Gryffindor. > Slytherin is not the house of the mean! Cunning and ambition have > absolutely nothing to do with teasing Olive Hornby. Furthermore, if > she's just getting back at Olive for teasing her, that's just like > Harry! Harry, Ron, and Hermione relish opportunities to make fun of > Malfoy because of how he treats them. And they're all Gryffindors. > Ron took "absolute pleasure" in recalling Malfoy's experience as a > bouncing ferret. I don't believe Myrtle's behavior points toward her being in any particular house. Erin: With James I'll agree. But with HRH, Malfoy ALWAYS starts it. Always. Ron may recall the ferret incident with pleasure while alone with Harry and Hermione, but wouldn't bring it up to Malfoy unless Malfoy taunted him first. Maybe Slytherin won't be "the house of the mean" in future canon. But as yet, I haven't seen anything to prove that it isn't! I don't want it to be, don't get me wrong. I think, as many others here do, that it would be awful to assume you could separate out the evil kids at the age of 11, and that would be it. But I am increasingly getting the feeling that JKR may think it is perfectly alright for the WW to do so. > > Erin: > > The second reason that if she were a Slytherin, she could be THE > good Slytherin that many people on this list believe in. >nibleswik: > THE good Slytherin? Well, I haven't been on this list for that long, so I may just have missed these discussions, but I believe there are many more than one good Slytherin. And if there is only one good Slytherin, if there is THE good Slytherin, might I hazard a guess that said Slytherin would be Snape? Erin: You're right, there may be more than one, but THE good Slytherin is believed to be someone in Harry's age group who will join his "team" and work with the trio, just like Luna Lovegood from Ravenclaw has done. This will be a way of reconciling the houses. So Snape isn't eligable. Plus he only became good after he got out of Slytherin. > Erin: > > Also, it seems suspicious to me that so many of the people who are now at Hogwarts, namely Dumbledore, McGonagall, Hagrid, and > Myrtle, were all there when Tom Riddle was. > >nibleswik: > I don't think that suspicious at all, honestly. I mean, there are > natural time progressions -- it's not suspicious if the student at a university in 2000 is a tenured professor there in 2040, or even if > that's true of ten students. Erin: In a school with a staff (and arguably student body) as small as Hogwarts? I think it unlikely, at least. I may have misused the word suspicious. Read on. nibleswik: I imagine JKR arranged the timeline so > LV's second coming would be aligned with a time when lots of his > classmates and professors would be at Hogwarts. Why do you think > it's suspicious? Erin: That was really all I meant by suspicious- that JKR had arranged the timeline like you said. And that the fact that 4 people Riddle used to know back when he *was* Riddle are at Hogwarts now will turn out to be important to the plot. Erin From MadameSSnape at aol.com Mon Nov 10 21:14:00 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:14:00 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape's Reaction ( was: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco?) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84523 In a message dated 11/10/2003 8:28:02 AM Eastern Standard Time, Elvishooked at hotmail.com writes: 2) Snape knows very well that Lucius turned up at the graveyard when LV summoned the DE's because Harry told him so. We still need to figure out though why it surprised Snape that Lucius was there. Sherrie here: I'm assuming you're referring here to Snape's reaction to Harry in the hospital wing at the end of GoF. I never read this as surprise at Lucius' presence in the graveyard. I've interpreted his movement and glance as a warning to Harry to keep his ruddy mouth shut - a warning which Harry didn't take. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 10 21:18:53 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:18:53 -0000 Subject: Wormtail's silver hand (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84524 Carol wrote: > There is no solid evidence that he's a vampire... I don't mean to be > rude or dismissive, but I don't understand why anyone would want him > to be a vampire. What is the attraction of this theory? Me: I myself am not atttracted to the idea of Snape beng a vampire, and I really hope he is not :-) The only "real" clue for him being a vampire (or a "half vampire") is as I see it the interesting little detail that Lupin assigned a vampire-essay to be written by the class, after Snape had made them write an essay about werewolves clearly wanting someone to discover Lupin's identity (the only one who did was Hermione)... It could be Lupin's way of "getting back" at Snape, and it might not. But it would be just like Rowling to leave a clue like that in the text :-) Berit From tminton at deckerjones.com Mon Nov 10 21:25:38 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 15:25:38 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Of course Snape is a Slytherin, was: Re: Snape Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE9827@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84525 Tonya: > Knowing now that Snape is a good guy playing double agent. What house > do you think he was in?? **************************************** Cheekyweebisom said: Slytherin, obviously. I'll say it AGAIN: Slytherin =/= evil. If all Slytherins were evil, do you really think the house would still exist? I mean, DD was planning on getting rid of Divination, a subject he thought to be useless but harmless. Do you really think he'd be all happy-bouncy to have a house that produced only ESE wizards? Snape was teased because he was a Slytherin, because he was interested in the Dark Arts. He was therefore seen as bad. Snape was a DE. Now he's a good guy. I may be misunderstanding you, but the implication of your statement seems to be, "Snape's good, so he couldn't possibly have been a Slytherin." That is simply wrong. Furthermore, I'm pretty sure the head of each house was in said house. Moreover, Snape is both cunning and ambitious. What does the Sorting Hat sing? Does it sing, "Slytherin's the house for all the good-for-nothing bastards who will ruin life as we know it", or does it sing, "For instance, Slytherin / Took only pure-blood wizards / Of great cunning, just like him" (OotP, p. 205)? Yes, it is the second. Slytherins are supposed to be cunning, ambitious purebloods. The three traits don't automatically spell out evilness. Cheekyweebisom ********************************* Now me again Tonya: I wasn't trying to be smart.... I have been enjoying all the "House" discussions. I really thought that Black was a Slytherin and now after all these wonderful posts I am not sure. I was also sure that Snape was a Slytherin. Although I have not found canon to back that up!! I think that good wizards can and do come from Slytherin. Tonya (who was just trying for some more great conversations :) ) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 21:31:51 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:31:51 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84526 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Louis Badalament" wrote: > > Louis - My Question; > > Has Harry now become as close a friend with Neville, Luna, and Ginny > as he is with Hermione and Ron? Which is to say, will we see these > three also trailing around with him wherever he goes? bboy_mn: I wouldn't exactly say 'trailing around with', but without a doubt all three are going to have very expanded roles in the next two books. Neville is a big part of the prophecy, and many of us Neville fans have been saying for a long time now, that we need to keep an eye on Neville because he is a great and powerful wizard, and that big things are in store for him. Look for him to continue to develop as a wizard and as a person with the same speed or more than we saw in the DA Club. Ginny's character has been greatly fleshed out, and to some extent I think she will take up the role previously played by the Twins. Although, she won't be an exact 'prankster' replacement for them, I think she will have a strong presents and a strong role in influencing Harry. Luna is somewhat of an enigma. Her place in the grand scheme of things is a little unclear, but I believe, as many do, that she will be an important character in the coming books. She is much too deep to be there for no reason other than comic relief. My theory (one of many which are often conflicting)- I think we will see a very withdrawn Harry in the next book, but withdrawn in an odd way. By all outward appearances, he will seem OK. He will go to class, talk with his classmates, interact with other students but at the same time will be very separate from them. In a sense, Hermione and Ron will become more like Seamus and Dean, Harry will be very friendly and on good terms with them. As is typical, he will even hang out with them. To the outsides, things will seem normal, but to Hermione and Ron who know Harry very intimately, they will feel a 'distance' between them. This 'distance' will be a continuation of Harry's sense of being separate from the rest of people; I guess you could call him a marked man. He has a fate and a destiny that he must fulfill, a fate and a destiny that are out of his control. He has no choice but to allow himself to be carried by the tides. He also know that the weight of the whole wizard world rests on his shoulders, and that anyone he gets close to or he lets get close to him is at great risk. Rather that risk the loss of a friend, and rather than feel the pain of that loss, he will find it easier to keep himself emotionally distant from people. However, I think this means he will balance off his associations by spending more time with Neville, Ginny, and Luna. I think he will especially seek out Luna in times when he is most troubled, because she has a calm and a detachment that he can trust. He knows if he reveals some internal aspect of himself, Luna is not going to freak out and get all emotional. By not feeling the need to guard Luna's feels and thereby his own, he will feel very comfortable around her. I also think, it will be Luna who helps Harry realize that he can't distance himself from the people who are most important to him, and that the presents of their love far outweighs the possible loss of that love. Just a thought. bboy_mn From erinellii at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 21:33:20 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:33:20 -0000 Subject: sexism in the WW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84527 > > Erin: I know Susan Bones tells Harry that Amelia Bones is her "auntie", but I don't recall her saying that Amelia was her mother's sister or her father's sister. So Amelia could very well be her aunt by marriage (wed to Susan's mother's or father's brother) and have a whole houseful of kids for all we know. > Hickengruendler: > No. When Moody showed Harry the picture of the old Order, he said > that Edgar Bones was Amelia's brother and not brother in law. ut they still have both the name Bones. That measn either Amelia is unmarried or she decided to keep her family name after the wedding. Erin: Or else she married a cousin! No, I know I'm grasping at straws here. Point to Debbie. Thanks for the canon. Erin From afleitas at bankrate.com Mon Nov 10 21:36:30 2003 From: afleitas at bankrate.com (kneazelkid) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:36:30 -0000 Subject: I'd trust Hagrid with my life Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84528 I was re-reading this weekend and something struck me. One of DD's opening lines in book 1 is "I'd trust Hagrid with my life." This is one of those lines that just hung with me (like the Chamber pot joke from book 1 that ended up being the Room of Requirements in book 5). I'm pretty sure it is signifigant -- possibly DD's eventual death (I think we've pretty much all agreed that he'll die by the end of the series)will be because of trusting Hagrid (wouldn't that make his line from book 1 eerie upon re-reading?). Do any of you have any thoughts? Have I possibly missed an occasion where DD has already trusted Hagrid with his life? kneazelkid From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Nov 10 21:37:28 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:37:28 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84529 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > What if you all could attend a press-meeting with Rowling right now - > and you were allowed to ask her just one single question about the > books (the 5 already out - or the 2 to come) - what would you ask her? > It's not easy to pick just 1 question - but let me be the one to > start by saying: > > 1) How is Peter Pettigrew going to repay his dept to Harry for > saving his life? Jen: Ooooh, hard to narrow down to just one. There are so many pivotal, unanswered questions right now. OK, here's two ;), in my order of priority (at the moment): 1) What is the significance of Harry's and Lily's green, almond- shaped eyes? 2) What *really* happened that fateful night in Godric's Hollow, the night the Potters died? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 21:23:01 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:23:01 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84530 > Carol wrote: > > Lupin was made a Gryffindor prefect to keep an eye on his friends, > > Clarification, please: > > It says Lupin was made a prefect to keep an eye on his friends. Does > it confirm anywhere that he was a *Gryffindor* prefect? I think he > could still carry some weight with his pals even if he were a prefect > from another house. I'm still betting on Lupin in Ravenclaw. > > Constance Vigilance As several people have pointed out, it's hard to keep an eye on your friends if they're in a different house. Also, if Lupin were in Ravenclaw, the Gryffindor boys would have needed their own prefect, and surely either Sirius or James would have been chosen for the post. (They had the grades for it, and the leadership abilities. James later became head boy.) Carol From eiffelangel at hotmail.com Mon Nov 10 21:35:13 2003 From: eiffelangel at hotmail.com (eiffelangel) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:35:13 -0000 Subject: Riddle = Slytherin? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84531 All pertinent quotes relating to my analysis: "Forinstance, Slytherin / Took only pure-blood wizards / Of great cunning, just like him..." (OotP, pg. 205) *~*~* " 'You stand, Harry Potter, upon the remains of my late father,' he hissed softly. 'A Muggle and a fool... very like your dear mother...' " (GoF, pg. 646) *~*~* " 'The heir alone would be able to unseal the Chamber of Secrets'... 'But maybe you've got to be related to Slytherin [to open it]...' " (CoS, pgs. 151-2) *~*~* If Slytherin took only pure-blooded wizards and Riddle was a half-blood, then why would he have been in Slytherin? It says that he was from Slytherin in PS/SS (I can't find the quote), but that was never confirmed by a credible source (i.e., someone old enough to remember and there, like a teacher)... at least, I don't remember there ever being a conformation. Please proove me wrong- I'm confused... Many have suggested that Harry's green eyes could mean that he was related to Slytherin. If only the "Heir of Slytherin" can open/find the chamber, both of which only Harry and Riddle did, could that mean that Harry is also an Heir of Slytherin? Riddle knows Harry's mother's lineage, and all evidence (that I've found) suggests that Riddle was already out of school when Harry's parents were attended Hogwarts. I'm guessing that lineage is not openly known (for instance, no one ever told Harry about someone's lineage unless they were siad person or knew them very well, i.e., Hagrid knowing Lily's lineage because they were in the OotP together). Perhaps he got to know Lily outside of Hogwarts? I'm not saying he fathered him or anything... after all, this isn't Star Wars... I'm making no conjectures, I'm just confused by conflicting canon. (say that three times fast!) Eiffelangel, Confused in California From kawfhw at earthlink.net Mon Nov 10 21:52:57 2003 From: kawfhw at earthlink.net (Ken and Faith Wallace) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:52:57 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84532 > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" > wrote: >> What if you all could attend a press-meeting with Rowling right > now - >> and you were allowed to ask her just one single question about the >> books (the 5 already out - or the 2 to come) - what would you ask > her? >> It's not easy to pick just 1 question - but let me be the one to >> start by saying: >> >> 1) How is Peter Pettigrew going to repay his dept to Harry for >> saving his life? > Well, this is something that has been nagging at me for a long time - but it isn't crucial (at least I don't think) to the story - where do wizard children go to school BEFORE Hogwarts. I mean, they don't get to Hogwarts until 11 - okay, but they already know how to read, write, and such - are they all home-schooled? Is there pre-wizarding school? Faith From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 21:52:25 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:52:25 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question - Public and Private In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84533 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > Inge: > > ... What if you all could ... ask (JKR) just one single question > about the books ... - what would you ask her? > > ...edited... > > It's not easy to pick just 1 question - but let me be the one to > start by saying: > > 1) How is Peter Pettigrew going to repay his dept to Harry for > saving his life? > > Please, make the list longer :-) > > Inge bboy_mn: Yes, that might be a good question to ask, but what are the odds that she would give you the answer thereby giving away part of the next books? Not much chance I think. So, one could ask instead, if you could ask JKRowling one question that you thought you could get a straight answer to, what would that question be? On the other hand, if you could ask her ANY question in a private conversation, a question which she would answer fully, directly, and completely, what would that question be? Now, that's a completely different situation. So we really have two questions and two approaches- One is, what would you like to ask that she is likely to answer, and the other is what would you personally really like to know. Which brings up a whole new question, if you ask your secret question and she gave you the secret answer, would you regret knowing it? Would you regret having that mystery solved before you read it in the book? So maybe we should each ask two questions- What is you public question for JKR? What is your private question for JKR? Public- What is the typical limit to the distance that a person is able to apparate, and what is the typical limit for Portkeys? I have my reasons for that odd question. Private- Right now, I can't think of anything that wouldn't spoil the story. It might be nice to know if it was going to be Harry or someone else who ultimately defeats Voldemort? I have suspicions that maybe Neville or Dobby might be the one. If she replied that it was someone else without saying who, that would be important insight, but without spoiling the story. Just a thought. bboy_mn From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 22:03:06 2003 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:03:06 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84534 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > This may be a bit OT but I was wondering - what if..... > What if you all could attend a press-meeting with Rowling right now - > and you were allowed to ask her just one single question about the > books (the 5 already out - or the 2 to come) - what would you ask her? More like a demand: Write faster! TK -- Tigerpatronus From kcawte at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 11 06:04:35 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:04:35 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Never tickle a sleeping dragon WAS: Caput Draconis References: Message-ID: <003701c3a819$b773bc50$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84535 Berit > > Sorry for not being clear, but that is what I was saying too :-) The > only one responsible for Lucius's prison sentence is himself, and the > one responsible for Sirius's death is not Snape, but Harry (and to > some extent Dumbledore since he didn't fill him in). > Me (K) (btw I'm back, yay, but I had to install a new copy of windows so anyone waiting on e-mail from me had better mail me again since I lost all my e-mail *and* my address book, also note the new address) How do you come to that conclusion? If the only one responsible for Lucius' prison sentence is Lucius (which I agree with btw) then the only person responsible for Sirius' death is Bellatrix Lestrange. Yes Sirius was there to rescue Harry and yes Harry probably wouldn't have been there if it wasn't for Dumbledore but neither of them killed Sirius. Sirius *chose* to go there knowing the dangers (as did every other member of the rescue party) and Bellatrix *chose* to kill him - although I guess there's room for arguing that it was an accident since afawk she didn't use AK on him. K From oppen at mycns.net Sat Nov 8 21:01:12 2003 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 15:01:12 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:sexism in the WW (Was I know Molly.....) References: Message-ID: <000001c3a687$b34efd80$8f560043@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 84536 > I think that Tonks and Hermione are just more aware than the men and > boys of how much work is involved in preparing a meal. It reminds me > of a muggle Thanksgiving in America. In my experience, the female > guests will always volunteer to help the hostess peel the potatoes > and set the table or whatever, as an act of courtesy. The male guests > will always sit in the living room with the hostess's husband, > watching TV(they're muggles, after all) or talking. Seldom will a male > over the age of twelve volunteer to help with the dinner. Maybe they > know they'll be asked to stay out of the way. Maybe they don't want > their masculinity challenged. Whatever the reason, the situation at > Grimmauld Place is very similar. At least, though, the boys do help > Molly de-doxify the curtains and so on. > > Carol Cooking is also a fairly high-skill activity, and most kitchens also only have _so_ much room in them, so when complicated cooking is going on, unskilled help might not be much use for anything except getting in the way and being told how to do things that, to a cook, are elementary and as reflexive as breathing, but are arcane and difficult for a non-cook. Also, ask yourselves---if _you_ had kids like Gred-and-Forge, how would _you_ feel about letting them within a mile of the kitchen? From dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 22:08:23 2003 From: dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com (dudemom_2000) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:08:23 -0000 Subject: Questions to ponder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84537 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" wrote: > Snip< >Two questions to ponder for fun: (One)What do you think Dudley > heard when the dementors came after him at the beginning of OotP? *****\(@@)/***** Dudemom_2000 replies: I think Dudley hears everyone screaming because Hagrid gave him a pig's tail - that has to be one of the worst memories Dudley has. Or my other thought would be the despair and hunger pangs he feels because he can't eat during his diet. >Snip< and > (Two) How did other muggle-born wizards learn where to buy their > school supplies and how to get onto Platform 9 and 3/4 once they > received their Hogwarts' letters? Harry would not have known how to do any of this without Hagrid or the chance meeting with the Weasley family. How did Hermione or Colin Creevey manage? > > -JJPandy Dudemom_2000 again replies: I would assume the muggle-born get additional instructions with their letters. Hagrid was sent after Harry so there was no need for him to receive anything further. Also it could be that the information was sent to Harry in the first letters but as we know he was never able to open them. Dudemom_2000 *****\(@@)/***** From kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 22:09:24 2003 From: kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com (kateydidnt2002) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:09:24 -0000 Subject: Riddle = Slytherin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84538 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eiffelangel" wrote: > All pertinent quotes relating to my analysis: > > "Forinstance, Slytherin / Took only pure-blood wizards / Of great > cunning, just like him..." (OotP, pg. 205) > > *~*~* > > " 'You stand, Harry Potter, upon the remains of my late father,' he > hissed softly. 'A Muggle and a fool... very like your dear mother...' " > (GoF, pg. 646) > > *~*~* > > " 'The heir alone would be able to unseal the Chamber of > Secrets'... 'But maybe you've got to be related to Slytherin [to open > it]...' " (CoS, pgs. 151-2) > > *~*~* > > If Slytherin took only pure-blooded wizards and Riddle was a > half-blood, then why would he have been in Slytherin? I would call the sorting-hat's words a generalization. I doubt that in the thousand or so years Hogwarts has been open that there has *never* been a half blood or muggle born in slytherin. In books one through four Slytherin is described as cunning, using any means to achieve their own ends and such. *That* is the main criteria for Slytherin house, and pureblood is a second consideration. It is my thought that Tom Riddle's slytherin characteristics outweighed the drawback of him being a halfblood. Kateydidnt From kcawte at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 11 06:11:40 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:11:40 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Of course Snape is a Slytherin, was: Re: Snape References: Message-ID: <006b01c3a81a$aff7bb10$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84539 > Tonya: > > Knowing now that Snape is a good guy playing double agent. What > house > > do you think he was in?? > Me (K) The Hat chooses students based on certain personality traits (or genetic traits possibly in the case of Slytherin) so it makes sense to me that the head of each house would be from that house or they wouldn't understand their students well enough to help them/catch them when they make mischief. A Ravenclaw (for example) probably wouldn't understand Gryffindors well enough to help them with any problems and certainly wouldn't be able to guess what mischief they were up to. Now there are exceptions to this obviously - Hermione might well have enough Ravenclaw in her to be a Ravenclaw House Head at some point in the distant future and I think Ron might just be able to understand the Hufflepuffs (and no that's not meant to be an insult before the Ron-lovers start trying to throw heavy objects at me). Anyway, my point is I think Severus would have to be a Slytherin (and Minerva a Gryffindor, Professor Sprout a Hufflepuff and Filius a Ravenclaw) K From afleitas at bankrate.com Mon Nov 10 22:22:10 2003 From: afleitas at bankrate.com (kneazelkid) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:22:10 -0000 Subject: non-human students -- Where are they? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84540 Am I tainted by the movie or is Flitwick not a human? If so, he was a student at Hogwarts at one point (he's the head of his house) -- so where are the other non-human students at Hogwarts? I know there has been guessing about some students being part-something, none of them are as outwardly something-else like Flitwick. Thoughts? kneazelkid From oppen at mycns.net Sun Nov 9 18:38:55 2003 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 12:38:55 -0600 Subject: FILK: Duet for two enemies Message-ID: <003801c3a6f0$bbcc5c00$e6570043@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 84541 ---------- Duet for Two Enemies to the tune of _Send In The Clowns_ Harry (singing): He killed my mom He killed my dad All of the things that he's done Make me so mad, Lord Voldemort. Lord Voldemort (singing): I was on top, Life was first-rate, Then my curse backfired on me, What a bad fate! Lord Voldemort, I'm Lord Voldemort! Harry: Evil, he is, Killer, and worse, He wants to see me carried off in a hearse, Wants to rule all the Wizarding World, Challenge is made, Flag is unfurled! Voldemort: I've got to win, Death's my great fear, Life, at least my life, is terribly dear! Lord Voldemort I'm Lord Voldemort, Isn't that clear? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Mon Nov 10 22:57:06 2003 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:57:06 -0000 Subject: Wormtail's silver hand (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84542 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: There is no solid evidence that he's a vampire, only an occasional suggestive image (and Sirius has the same traits, overtly described as vampirelike in his case). And I can't think of any plot-related reason why he would need to be one (other than as an ambassador to the vampires, and we've already had that sort of subplot with Hagrid). Snape is pretty clearly a "pure blood" wizard, based on his reference to Lily as a "mudblood" and his aversion to werewolf Lupin (as well as his placement in Slytherin, if the sorting hat follows Salazar Slytherin's criterion for admission to his house). I don't mean to be rude or dismissive, but I don't understand why anyone would want him to be a vampire. What is the attraction of this theory? Carol Me: So far I didn't see any plot-related reason for Snape to be a vampire either - but that doesn't mean it will not be there in the future, right? At least there is a lot of talk about blood in general in the books already. As for the attraction of the theory... I happen to love Snape and all his nasty little comments. Snape is powerful in his own, dark way and maybe it's just me (being a woman with a lusty attraction to blood- suckers, that is), but add to Snapes' own powers the powers of a vampire and Snape would be almost untouchable. Some women just happen to be attracted to such things - so I guess for some of us it's as much a question of lust and desire as anything else to want Snape to be a vampire. Not a very good reason - but still.... Inge From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Mon Nov 10 23:02:55 2003 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:02:55 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question - Public and Private In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84543 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: Yes, that might be a good question to ask, but what are the odds that she would give you the answer thereby giving away part of the next books? Not much chance I think. A little veritaserum should do the work, don't you think? Sorry, - couldn't resist and yes, I know - this ought to have been kept a private message. Inge From probono at rapidnet.com Mon Nov 10 23:03:34 2003 From: probono at rapidnet.com (probonoprobono) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:03:34 -0000 Subject: luna equals silver Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84544 While researching for a chemistry paper on the internet today, I came across some interesting information. The word "luna" is actually an ancient alchemical term for silver. Silver symbolically represents the moon in alchemy (as gold represents the sun), it's alchemy symbol is a crescent moon. So there is still a connection to the word luna and the moon, but this is the first I have realized that luna literally means "silver" in alchemy and now I'm terribly intrigued. Will there be some connection between Luna and Lupin in the future? Maybe that silver hand of Wormtail's was just a red-herring after all? Just a curious thought with no basis in anything, really. Incidentally, does anyone know the origins of the silver/werewolf connection? Perhaps the importance of the moon to both silver and werewolves is what led people to put them together. Really just rambling.... Tanya From john at sunstoneonline.com Mon Nov 10 23:02:58 2003 From: john at sunstoneonline.com (John Hatch) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:02:58 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: I'd trust Hagrid with my life References: <1068503076.20497.11029.m17@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000201c3a7df$b29e72e0$0e00a8c0@sunstone77nev7> No: HPFGUIDX 84545 > I was re-reading this weekend and something struck me. One of DD's > opening lines in book 1 is "I'd trust Hagrid with my life." This is > one of those lines that just hung with me (like the Chamber pot joke > from book 1 that ended up being the Room of Requirements in book 5). > > I'm pretty sure it is signifigant -- possibly DD's eventual death (I > think we've pretty much all agreed that he'll die by the end of the > series)will be because of trusting Hagrid (wouldn't that make his > line from book 1 eerie upon re-reading?). This may have some future significance, however, I read this as JKR's way of introducing us to Hagrid. Within the same conversation between DD and McGonagall we also learn that DD is the only wizard Voldemort fears and it is implied that DD is a respected and extremely powerful wizard. This in turn raises our respect for Hagrid because DD will trust his life to Hagrid. This also speaks to the qualities that are important to DD: loyalty, bravery, and sincerity - all of which Hagrid possesses. John (who is in denial about an eventual DD death) This message was checked by MailScan for WorkgroupMail. www.workgroupmail.com From deemarie1a at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 23:19:35 2003 From: deemarie1a at yahoo.com (Donna) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:19:35 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84546 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" wrote: > > This may be a bit OT but I was wondering - what if..... > > What if you all could attend a press-meeting with Rowling right > now - > > and you were allowed to ask her just one single question about the > > books (the 5 already out - or the 2 to come) - what would you ask > her? There is just one pressing question on my mind: Since you won't be revisiting the Potterverse after book 7, would you be willing for another writer to take up the saga where you left off? D From sydenmill at msn.com Mon Nov 10 23:33:11 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:33:11 -0000 Subject: Caput Draconis, WAS: Re: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84547 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote in message #84459: > > Caput Draconis means 'the head of the dragon'. I've always felt it > was somehow related to 'pig snout', another Gryffindor password, but > I can't work 'fairy lights' or any of the others into a pattern. > > I thought there was a star named Caput Draconis, but what I have > found between http://www.r-clarke.org.uk/propernames1.htm and > http://www.ras.ucalgary.ca/~gibson/starnames/starnames.html?o=0 and > http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~kaler/sow/sowlist.html is: > > Thuban (alpha Draconis) > Rastaban (beta Draconis) > Eltanin (gamma Draconis) > Altais (delta Draconis) > > "Thuban is one of the fainter stars that carries a proper name, almost > certainly because of its immense historical role as [a previous Pole > Star]. Its importance is further highlighted in that it is the Alpha > star of Draco (the Dragon) even though it not close to being the > brightest of this long and rambling constellation, easily exceeded in > visibility by Gamma, Beta, and even Eta Draconis. .... Even though the > star is in the Dragon's tail, its name confusingly derives from an > Arabic phrase meaning "the Serpent's head," having been borrowed from > the name for another star." > > "The great northern serpent's neck points southward, Draco the > Dragon's two leading stars looking like two eyes staring at Hercules. > The names of both come from the same Arabic root, which means "the > serpent." Eltanin (Gamma, the eastern star) means just that, "the > serpent," while Rastaban (Beta, the western one) comes from a longer > phrase that means "the serpent's head," and in fact was once applied > to the star now known as Eltanin. Shining at the bright end of third > magnitude (2.79), Rastaban is the just barely the third brightest star > in the constellation, beat out by Eltanin and by Eta Draconis, though > it still masters Thuban, the fainter Alpha star (whose name shares the > same root)." > > "DELTA Dra : Nodus Secundus or Altais : second knot" or ?? (misreading > of same word as in Gamma Dra)" > > btw, let me quite irrelevantly note the names of 3 stars in Libra: > Zubenelgenubi "southern claw" (alpha) > Zubenelschamali "northern claw (beta) > Zubenelschamali "northern claw (gamma) Bohcoo responds: Wow. Thank you for that impressive and interesting interpretation. And Geoff, too, made an interesting point about the Latin meaning of the phrase in his post #84472. I merely thought JKR might be having a little light-hearted fun with a play on words. Bohcoo From nineve_laguna at hotmail.com Mon Nov 10 23:35:19 2003 From: nineve_laguna at hotmail.com (nineve_laguna) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:35:19 -0000 Subject: Nicolas Flamel is real Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84548 JKR fans might be impressed (as i was) to find out that Nicollas Flamel is in fact a real alchemist. I was doing a research about colors in the library (not the restricted section) and stumbled by a book that actually mentioned him and his alchemy work. It was only a mention, together with some other alchemists' names, but I was thrilled! It might be worth checking him up if anyone wants to do a more in depth research. Thought you would like to know. Nineve. From kcawte at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 11 08:03:01 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:03:01 -0800 Subject: JKR and Mythology References: Message-ID: <000b01c3a82a$3b13ec00$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84549 The message about Flamel made me remember this. I've been doing some research on legends about faeries (for a book I'm hoping to write) and I discovered two things. Vilas are female nature spirits who are so beautiful that when a man looks on them he falls in love and pines away for them until he dies. And there is a type of brownie called a Dobie, like most brownies it does housework and stuff for humans but it is fairly dim and while meaning well often causes trouble :) Hmmm, sounds familiar, yes? K From arianaseibel at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 20:52:47 2003 From: arianaseibel at yahoo.com (Ariana Seibel) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:52:47 -0000 Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint by having him not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84550 Cheekyweebisom said: It seems to me that there must be something else going on here. What could make Snape favor the child of a DE? I can think of a few things: -Snape is still working for LV. -Snape doesn't know Lucius is a DE. -Snape simply needs someone to favor in each year, and Draco's the most promising, future DE or not. -Draco is Snape's sex toy, and as such, gets preferential treatment. -Snape wants to train a replacement -- a Slytherin who can do work for the Order. Who better than the son of one of LV's right-hand men, provided he can convert Draco to the good side? Ariana says: Or perhaps he fells compassion for a boy with a mean father? From nibleswik at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 22:01:30 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:01:30 -0000 Subject: I'd trust Hagrid with my life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84551 > I was re-reading this weekend and something struck me. One of DD's > opening lines in book 1 is "I'd trust Hagrid with my life." I'm pretty sure it is significant -- possibly DD's eventual death (I > think we've pretty much all agreed that he'll die by the end of the > series)will be because of trusting Hagrid (wouldn't that make his > line from book 1 eerie upon re-reading?). > > Do any of you have any thoughts? Have I possibly missed an occasion > where DD has already trusted Hagrid with his life? I don't remember if DD's already trusted him, but wow! That's interesting. It's especially interesting if you think about the incident most important to the plot thus far in which someone trusted another someone with their life -- Pettigrew being the Potters' Secret-Keeper. Wonder if this is a hint that the character who appears to be Jolly!Animal-Loving!Hagrid is really ESE!Hagrid. Probably not, but it would be interesting. Cheekyweebisom From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 10 22:19:24 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:19:24 -0000 Subject: crowns and the Alchymical Wedding In-Reply-To: <20031110141417.74523.qmail@web25105.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84552 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Ivan Vablatsky wrote: Hans: > Harry Potter never ceases to delight and surprise me. I keep finding more > gems hidden away in the nooks and crannies of the story. > ? > I came upon this sentence right in the beginning of chapter 10 of OoP. "Mrs > Weasley sobbed over Kreacher's dead body, watched by Ron and Hermione who > were wearing crowns." > > Wearing crowns! How could I have missed that! It hit me like a flash of > lightning. This is another subtle but clear reference to the Alchymical > Wedding of Christian Rosencreutz. > > A few > months ago there was a big debate in this group about whether Harry Potter > is everyman or Christ. I say he is both! Geoff: I feel that I can only disagree with your view on Harry Potter. He cannot be an everyman or Christ. No person can be a Christ figure except Christ himself, God in human form. We can be Christ-like; we are enjoined to imitate Christ ? read Philippians 2 for example. Hans: > This is the new religion of the Age of Aquarius. Man will realise that > everyone is called to become a Son of God through the self- sacrifice of the > limited, earthly self, for the inner God Who lies dormant in each of us. Geoff: Christ is referred to as the Son of Man or the Son of God. We are told in John 1 that, speaking of Jesus, "to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become the children of God" ? not the same. We know from interviews etc. that Jo Rowling claims to be a Christian. I am not sure whether her membership of the Church of Scotland indicates nominal Christianity or real belief; that is not for me to judge. However, in message 75634, I raised the question of "second guessing" JKR. I would be surprised to find that she found time to read a slightly obscure book such as "The Alchymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz" in such depth as to incorporate its ideas so fully into the Harry Potter books as you suggest because, if one takes on board all the other theories and sources put forward by various correspondents, she must have done nothing but read all these various books for months and then plan how all these various ideas and theories were to be dovetailed into her writing plan. JKR has not written overtly as a Christian; neither did Tolkien, But, with a Christian background, I find that many of the items you detail as part of the "new religion of the Age of Aquarius" merely shadow central parts of Christian faith when that faith is really followed and not merely paid lip service. Can't JKR write her own story? Yes. Isn't it interesting though that JKR has made Harry the Seeker in the Quidditch team? That's the term often used in Christian circles for those who truly look for the right way to go in life. Harry may make many mistakes along the way, but he is anxious that the right is seen to prevail for the benefit of his friends, the Wizarding World and the future. Geoff From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 22:19:51 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:19:51 -0000 Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint by having him not? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84553 "nibleswik" wrote: > Why does Snape hate Harry? Because he hated James and Harry reminds > him of James. Following that, shouldn't Snape despise Draco? I mean, > Harry's father was an asshole to Snape, but Draco's dad is a DE! And > Snape's the anti-DE, in some ways, more than DD is. I think Snape's > the ultimate anti-DE because he went through it; the most fervent > are often those who experienced that which they're fighting against. > But in any case, Snape's waging a war against Lucius, yet Draco's > his favorite? What the hell?! > I think, first, that Lucius Malfoy may have been Snape's contact as a spy for the Order of the Phoenix until Malfoy was arrested. Snape couldn't have gone directly to Voldemort, but he may have convinced Malfoy that he's biding his time and needs to be near Harry to see what he's up to. (Voldemort no doubt realizes that Snape is his enemy, but he probably doesn't confide in his Death Eaters and Malfoy may not know that Snape is the one who will not return. He also doesn't know that Snape sent the Order to the MoM to rescue Harry and his friends.) Since Malfoy and the others could escape from Azkaban at any time, Snape needs to maintain the semblance of friendship with Malfoy to maintain his cover, he can't afford to rouse Draco's suspicions by being fair to the Gryffindors (or taking may points from Slytherin). All this may change with Lucius in prison but I don't think it will. Also I read somewhere (not on this list) the intriguing idea that Snape is weakening the Slytherins, especially Draco, by going easy on them and strengthening the Gryffindors by exposing them to criticism and forcing them to attain higher standards in his classes. One of the traits JKR keeps mentioning in relation to Draco is his lazy drawl. I think the drawl reflects laziness in general. Draco is spoiled, at least by his mother, and he relies on bullyish bodyguards to do his fighting for him. The more Snape pampers him, the less effectual he's going to be if he ever finds the courage (or nerve or whatever) to become a Death Eater. Carol From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 22:36:56 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:36:56 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84554 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermowninny719" wrote: > Now me: > > I don't think JKR ever said James was in Gryffindor in an interview. > The closest thing I can find is when she was asked "Whiat position > did James play on the Gryffindor Quidditch team?" She > responded, "James was a chaser." That is neither confirmation or > denial of his house association. True. Now we have to ask ourselves would/should JKR have corrected the interviewer about James's house if the interview had said the wrong one. Also, why did the interview think James was in Gryffindor? Was this because of an answer to a previous question? > I also don't think students wear any house-specific markings on their > uniforms. I believe this is movie-contamination. Is there canon to > support a different unform and/or badge, etc. for each house? > -Hermowninny They don't wear house specific markings. Remember in CoS when Harry and Ron disguised as Slytherins asked a girl where the Slytherin common room was and she said she was in Ravenclaw. They never could have mistaken a student from one house for another if they wore markings. They wouldn't have had to guess who was a Slytherin in the first place. House markings would have solved that problem easily. Also, it is not just the movie. Various book covers and the video games also have house markings. Some book covers had Harry wearing a red cape *shudder* and others had him wearing a red and yellow Gryffinor scarf. The video games, had different color robes or colored piping around the edge of the robes as well. Incidentally, this still isn't canon, but wouldn't Harry know what house his Dad was in. In PS/SS McGonagall said Harry's dad was "an excellent Quidditch player". This part is speculation, but I would imagine that Harry would have at some point gone in to the trophy room and seen his Dad's name on a trophy or two. More speculation, what about the photo album Hagid gave Harry?. The book doesn't describe all the photos in the album. Since his parents died fairly young, some pictures could have been from their Hogwarts' days. There could have been photos of James in the Gryffindor common room. Also, if his Dad was in his quidditch robes, then his house will be obvious. Sportting attire always marks the teams. I'm sure their quidditch robes have the house colors and/or mascots. Although, it isn't canon and I realize we have to be wary of Harry's POV, I think JKR was telling us James's house in that statement. Yolanda From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 22:46:44 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:46:44 -0000 Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84555 Inge wrote: > 5) If Draco really likes Snape and trusts him - then it would be a > very good reason for Snape to keep favoring Draco. Snape might be the > one to eventually get Draco on the 'good side' - depending of course > how the relationship between Snape and Lucius has been in the past > and what it will be like in the future. I can't see anyone getting Draco onto the good side now that his father has been sent to Azkaban, even if it were possible before. Draco has a real grudge to motivate him now, not mere malice lazily directed at Harry and his friends. In any case, I'm not at all sure that Snape's true feelings are reflected in his treatment of Draco, as I indicated in my previous post. Whatever the case with Snape and Draco, I'm certain that the relationship between Snape and Draco's father is very important. I'd like to know, for one thing, what Sirius meant by his "lap dog" reference. It seems to me that the relationship between Lucius Malfoy and Snape probably is not one of equals. Snape is five or six years younger than Malfoy and could have been little more than a tag-along in the year or two when they were both at Hogwarts. Also Snape earns his living by teaching. Malfoy is like a nineteenth-century English gentleman whose wealth was inherited and consequently considered earning a living to be beneath him. I'm not sure whether Malfoy and Snape were ever really friends, but I'd bet my Time Turner if I had one that it was Lucius's influence that led Severus to join the DEs in the first place. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 23:06:59 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:06:59 -0000 Subject: Never tickle a sleeping dragon WAS: Caput Draconis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84556 > Berit wrote: > I have got a distinct > impression that is actually what Harry did at the end of > OoP, "tickled a sleeping Draco"... On pages 749-751 (British Version) > Harry bumps into Draco in the Entrance Hall. To me this little > incident describes a "new" Draco, a much more dangerous Draco. > > My two knuts: Harry's in deep trouble. Draco dormiens nunquam > titillandus... > > Berit I agree with every word of this excellent post and have nothing more to add except to ask a question on a related matter. At least one of Draco's sidekicks (Crabbe) will have much the same motivation for increased hatred of Harry (though of course we can't expect him to do much except lash out with blind rage and follow Draco's lead). But did anyone besides me notice the apparent absence of Goyle, Sr., from the Battle of MoM? Is his absence significant or is it just an oversight? Thoughts, anybody? Carol From nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 22:55:12 2003 From: nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com (nkittyhawk97) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 22:55:12 -0000 Subject: Ogg the Gamekeeper Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84557 Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Hagrid said he got the Gamekeeper job after he was kicked out of Hogwarts (maybe right after, a year after - that sort of time frame) Well, I though it a bit strange that Mrs. Weasley at the end of GoF was reminiscing about the gamekeeper that came before Hagrid (Ogg). Wouldn't that mean she (and, of course, Arthur) were at school with Tom Riddle, Hagrid and Myrtle, or even *before* them? ___nkittyhawk, who doesn't believe in flints. From nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 23:07:51 2003 From: nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com (nkittyhawk97) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:07:51 -0000 Subject: Riddle = Slytherin? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84558 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "eiffelangel" > wrote: > > > > If Slytherin took only pure-blooded wizards and Riddle was a > > half-blood, then why would he have been in Slytherin? > I always thought that the thing about "only taking purebloods" was only expressing the ignorance and thought-to-be superiority towards muggleborns. Even if his father was a muggle, his mother was still a direct descendant of Salazar himself. Please, people, remember that Harry would have been placed in Slytherin if he hadn't chosen not to, *despite* the fact that his mother was a muggleborn. Had he kept his mouth shut while being sorted, he would have anded up in Slytherin, thus disproving the assumption that only purebloods can be in Slytherin. If Tom Riddle's qualities that were given to Harry would have swayed the Sorting Hat to put Harry, the son of a Gryffindor, into Slytherin, then of course Riddle was in Slytherin. If he wasn't, how would that have affected the Hat so strongly towards Harry? From nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 23:14:23 2003 From: nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com (nkittyhawk97) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:14:23 -0000 Subject: luna equals silver In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84559 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "probonoprobono" wrote: > > Incidentally, does anyone know the origins of the silver/werewolf > connection? nkittyhawk: Well, it was believed that werewolves could only be killed by a silver bullet. My interpretation being that silver is fatal to a werewolf. But it's strange that silver=moon in alchemy. I guess, in the same way that silver is fatal to the *wolf*, the mon is fatal to Remus. IMHO, there is a connection between Luna and Lupin. Maybe it's the fact that Luna is called 'Loony Lovegood' and that Peeves called Remus 'Loony, Loopy, Lupin' Perhaps Peeves was the one who originated Luna's nickname, therfore causing me to conclude that Peeves knows a secret... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 10 23:54:53 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:54:53 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84560 > > Steve wrote: > > > James is in Gryffindor. That's given in the book. It's on page > 704 > > > of the US edition of OP. Ron rumples his hair and Harry grins > > > because it reminds him "forcibly of another Gryffindor Quidditch > > > player...", which is a reference to James's actions Harry > witnessed > > > in Snape's memory. > > > Hickengruendler wrote: > It was also confirmed in an interview by JKR, I think. She said that > Harry's parents were in Gryffindor. > > I can't find anything on James other than the remark that he was the Gryffindor chaser (not seeker), but Lily was definitely in Gryffindor according to an October 16, 2000, interview http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/1000-scholastic-chat.htm: Q. Which house was Lily Potter in, and what is her maiden name? A. Her maiden name was Evans, and she was in Gryffindor (naturally). Notice the "naturally." She states elsewhere that Hagrid was in Gryffindor, also with a "naturally." Gryffindor is her favorite house (Oct. 16 interview) and she didn't correct the person who stated that James was on the Gryffindor team. It seems to me that there are some things we can safely deduce from strong evidence, and James being in Gryffindor is one of them. I know we've been fooled before (it never occurred to me that Sirius Black might not be a murderer). Nevertheless, on a point as simple as this one, I see no reason to doubt Harry's assumption that his father was also in Gryffindor. Carol From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Mon Nov 10 23:47:49 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:47:49 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] luna equals silver References: Message-ID: <004501c3a7e5$7433b140$7ad21e43@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84561 > Incidentally, does anyone know the origins of the silver/werewolf > connection? Perhaps the importance of the moon to both silver and > werewolves is what led people to put them together. > > Really just rambling.... > > > Tanya > Iggy here: *sigh* I can't access the specific message number at the moment due to a rather erratic internet connection... (I seem to just have enough time to send and receive e-mails... if I'm lucky...) but in a rather lengthy post in the Wormtail's Silver Hand topic, I went rather in depth about silver and werewolves. I also went into great detail about vampire lore as well. I will also paste the entire message to the bottom of this letter for ease of reference. While I can't give you the message number, I can give you the time-stamp on it: Saturday, November 08, 2003 9:49 AM (This is Central time, if it matters.) Unfortunately, as few people seem to notice my posts, they often get lost in the shuffle. Iggy McSnurd (the MLTA) Carol: > Still no takers? Let me ask more simply then. Does anyone think that > Wormtail is going to kill Lupin with his silver hand? Why or why not? Iggy here: Something I pointed out during the earlier discussion about silver and werewolves... Silver is no real harm to werewolves when they are in their human form. It's also only really dangerous to them when used as a weapon. This is similar to the fact that a vampire can handle a wooden stake with no problem, provided that they don't try to plunge it through their own heart. Silver is considered the lunar metal (as gold is considered to be the solar one) and therefore is the only weapon truly effective against lycanthropes. (Well, most of them, anyhow...) It is also considered to be the only metal that is truly pure on a spiritual level, and as lycanthropy is deemed in many folklores as a taint not only of the body, but of the spirit and soul, using purity against corruption is a logical choice. In other words, the argument that Lupin handled, and drank from, the silver goblet proving he isn't harmed by silver is pure poppycock. I can handle a bullet without harm, but if someone shot me with one, it's a different story. > A related question regarding Sirius's schoolboy "prank": If Snape were > a vampire, couldn't he have fought werewolf Lupin in that form? If > we're going by folklore, nothing can kill a vampire but a stake of > holly to the heart, right? Why would he have needed to learn > occlumency or any form of defense against the dark arts if he were > virtually immortal? Iggy here again: I actually did a speech for a class once on the three major methods to kill a traditional vampire. Please note that these techniques of eleimination or detection are valid for only the traditional European vampire. Many other forms of vampire exist that don't meet these conditions. One example is a form of African vampire that's invisible all the time and can only be slain by a shaman or priest wielding a wooden sword or spear.) 1: Binding the spirit to the ground with a stake made of oak, ash, yew, or holly. This not only stakes the body to the ground, but also, because of the type of wood and location of the stake in the body, does the same to the wayward soul of the vampire. This was also accompanied by one or more of the following: a: filling the mouth with consecrated holy wafers and sewing the lips closed with silver wire. b: hamstringing the corpse both at the heel and knees. c: driving an iron spike into the skull. d: searing out the eyes with heated coins of silver. e: decapitating the corpse and placing the head between the knees of the body. f: burying the body at a crossroads. The demonic soul that posesses the body becomes confused as to which way to go when it rises from the ground, and is stuck at the crossroads until morning, when it must return to the ground. 2: Exposing the body to the full light of the sun. Not only is the sun considered to be a purifying agent of life, but in many cultures, it is seen as being a form of the "Light of God" itself. As such, it purifies all evil that it touches. A vampire, being seen as a being of purest evil and darkness, they are virtually disintegrated by the rays of the sun. 3: Submerging the vampire within swiftly moving, fairly clean water. The water, be it a river, waterfall, or swift stream, draws the poisons and impurities from a person's body and washes it away. Since a vampire is seen, by nature, as being impure corrupted, the water washes away the whole of its being. Now, as for detecting if someone's a vampire... Supposedly they are repelled by garlic. Old wive's tale and not to be relied on, IMHO. In the old days, garlic was a cure for everything. Got a cold, use garlic. Suffering the pox, use garlic. Plagued by vampires, use garlic... (I'm pretty sure that the House Elves don't need to take the trouble to set up a separate meal for Snape, and some of the food he eats probably has garlic in it. Not only that, he wouldn't be able to be at the same table as a meal with garlic in it. Add in the fact that, if Quirrel's turban did contain garlic, Snape wouldn't have been able to talk with him up close and personal.) Commonly, they have no reflection in a mirror, especially one with a pure silver backing. Possible, depending on the vampire lore you're dealing with. In many cultures, a mirror is seen as not reflecting a person's body, but their soul. As a vampire is seen as a soulless being, they wouldn't appear in a mirror. (Hmmm... We've never seen Snape's reflection in a mirror other than the Foe Glass, which isn't really described as a mirror. But then again, the only person we've seen in a normal mirror in the books at all is Harry. I don't think the Mirror of Erised counts as a normal mirror. Besides, if Snape was a vampire and couldn't be reflected in a mirror, don't you think Dumbledore would give him access to the Mirror of Erised? After all, Snape would probably see himself in it, even if he were a vampire.) Vampires are often regarded as never casting a shadow, since the shadow was often seen as an evil counterpoint to the self and was absorbed into the vampire's body. (We rarely see anyone casting a shadow in any of the books, so I don't think we can depend on this at all. Besides, if Snape didn't cast a shadow at all, I think someone would have noticed it.) A vampire cannot bear the touch of the sun's rays. (Snape has been seen outside quite often, and with no ill effect. Otherwise, he wouldn't have been able to save Harry from Quirrel's jinx, and he wouldn't have been able to referee the Quidditch match between Gryffindor and Slytherin.) A vampire must be invited in by the master of a house in order to enter a private abode. This was often seen as a factor of the power a person had over the land they owned. As potent as a vampire is when compared to a human, this is seen as a power even they cannot take away from the owner of a house. This is also a symbol of the power the head of a family is seen to possess as well. (If this were the case, Snape wouldn't have been able to enter 12 Grimmauld Place without a direct invitation from Sirius. Dumbledore could reveal the location of the OotP HQ, but even he cannot grant Snape the power to enter. The need for the direct invitation would have given Snape away to Sirius as a vampire, and I'm pretty sure Sirius would have told Harry at some point.) A vampire can no longer consume mortal food and may only subsist on blood alone. Since they are no longer human, and live a wholly parasitic existence, a vampire's body cannot tolerate ingesting normal food. (We have seen Snape at the head table quite frequently, and as much of an issue was made about Moody drinking from the flask and examining his food so closely, I' feel confident in saying that if Snape had a "dietary restriction" that severe, we would have been informed about it in some way.) There's a lot more I can pull up here, but I think I've covered the most salient points. Iggy McSnurd From tcyhunt at earthlink.net Tue Nov 11 00:23:20 2003 From: tcyhunt at earthlink.net (Tracy Hunt) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:23:20 -0000 Subject: No, JK...don't answer was: Re: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84562 Inge asked: > It's not easy to pick just 1 question - but let me be the one to > start by saying: > > 1) How is Peter Pettigrew going to repay his dept to Harry for > saving his life? > > Please, make the list longer :-) > Tcy responds: No!!!!!!!! Am I the only one who doesn't want the answer to any of these millions of questions I have unless I'm reading them in the next 2 books? Finding out the answers to any of these in a Q & A session would be like someone telling me that Sirius dies in book 5 when I was still on GoF! As much as I want to know what happens...I'll just wait until the books come out, thank you very much. (I'll return to lurking now to hopefully duck all of the veggies about to be chucked in my direction) From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 00:11:41 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:11:41 -0000 Subject: Which house did Moaning Myrtle belong to? In-Reply-To: <14e.2650abca.2ce15803@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84563 >From message 84522 Erin said: > This will be a way of reconciling the houses. So Snape isn't > eligable. Plus he only became good after he got out of Slytherin. I thought once you were sorted you were always a Gryffindor/Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff/Slytherin even after you'd left Hogwarts. I'd simply assumed that you became an alumnus. Snape may have left school, but he is still a Slytherin, in fact he is now head of that house. >From message 84521: > Sherrie, over in the corner, glancing up from Tennessee Williams: > > The books don't really describe the uniforms, present or past, except that > they're "plain working robes". We assume somehow that there's a House > distinction - badge or whatever - because Harry is able to identify students' House > afffiliation at a distance in the books. Another explanaion would be that Harry simply knows what house they belong to. For example, back in school I could identify what year you were in by what classrooms I saw you going into/out of even though I didn't know your name. As we saw during the polyjuice incident, Ron and Harry couldn't tell who was a Slytherin and who wasn't. The girl they asked for directions to the Slytherin common room was a Ravenclaw. If the book uniforms, had any kind of house distinction, Ron and Harry wouldn't even have to guess who to ask. They'd know who the Slytherins are by their uniforms. Sherrie again: > However, the House badge concept most of us have (and I'm as guilty as any!) > is movie contamination. > > That said - the pin that YTR wears in the film isn't a House badge - it's his > Prefect badge. It's green and silver because he's a Slytherin Prefect, but > not every Slytherin wears one. Maybe they did. Perhaps Prefects replaced their regular house pin with their Prefect badge. We don't know that the other students didn't have pins. Did we get a good look at Rubeus during the scene with him and riddle? Did he have a pin? I'm not near my DVDs right now so I can't go check. However, you are right about the "movie contamination". Although the movie did make mistakes, some people do use it to supplement the book canon. For example, her ponytails, *could* have been covering a house pin to keep from revealing what house she's in. A fact that is *not* stated in (book) canon yet. Here's what I know about the movie uniforms: At http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/chat/hotseat/newsid_2516000/2516865. stm, I found this interview with Tom Felton (Draco Malfoy) and Shirley Henderson (Moaning Myrtle). "Lizo: There's been a lot of speculation on the internet earlier about your uniform and what house Myrtle was in when she was at Hogwarts - I've been trying to look at it but I couldn't quite see. Shirley Henderson: I can't remember what it is. Tom Felton: I'm sure it was Ravenclaw." Could Shirley really not remember or she was asked to keep it a secret. Tom may have given something away that he wasn't supposed to. One more bit on the movie uniform: "And we think we solved one mystery that no one's ever had the answer to before. She wore a blue uniform - which means she must have been in Ravenclaw house." I found that at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/tv_film/newsid_2526000/2526767.stm The problem is I don't know if the above quote was based on observation of the film or on the actual uniform she wore. If they were watching the film, then they saw the ghostly Myrtle which makes it hard to tell color. However if they saw the actual uniform the actress wore, then she has a ravenclaw. None of the above is conclusive, but Myrtle's movie uniform is leaning toward Ravenclaw. Yolanda From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 00:23:02 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:23:02 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84564 Inge wrote: > I think it might be quite fun to make a list of questions for [Rowling] . . . to find out the variaty of questions that > each of you are dying to ask if you got the chance - knowing that > she'd give you the answer. > > It's not easy to pick just 1 question - but let me be the one to > start by saying: > > 1) How is Peter Pettigrew going to repay his dept to Harry for > saving his life? > To begin with, I want to know what she meant by saying (in answer to why she made Quirrell rather than Snape the villain in SS/PS), "I know all about Snape and he'd never put on a turban." (Huh? Does that mean he'd never let another person manipulate his will by getting literally or figuratively inside his head? If not, what the heck does it mean?) Carol, who is glad that Snape wasn't the villain and likes the air of mystery that surrounds him but nevertheless wants to know a lot more about him From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Mon Nov 10 19:00:10 2003 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 14:00:10 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint by ha... Message-ID: <1cc.13fb0aef.2ce13a3a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84565 In a message dated 11/10/2003 4:31:10 AM Pacific Standard Time, nibleswik at yahoo.com writes: > Why does Snape hate Harry? Because he hated James and Harry reminds > him of James. Following that, shouldn't Snape despise Draco? I mean, > Harry's father was an asshole to Snape, but Draco's dad is a DE! And > Snape's the anti-DE, in some ways, more than DD is. I think Snape's > the ultimate anti-DE because he went through it; the most fervent > are often those who experienced that which they're fighting against. > But in any case, Snape's waging a war against Lucius, yet Draco's > his favorite? What the hell?! > > It seems to me that there must be something else going on here. What > could make Snape favor the child of a DE? I can think of a few > things: > > -Snape is still working for LV. > -Snape doesn't know Lucius is a DE. > -Snape simply needs someone to favor in each year, and Draco's the > most promising, future DE or not. > -Draco is Snape's sex toy, and as such, gets preferential treatment. > -Snape wants to train a replacement -- a Slytherin who can do work > for the Order. Who better than the son of one of LV's right-hand > men, provided he can convert Draco to the good side? You forget option 6: Snape is a double agent who has made friends with Lucius in order to get information from Voldy's inner circle and "likes" Draco so no one will get suspicious. Besides, he favours everyone in his own house-Slytherin-so it would be odd if he singled Draco out, especially when he is the son of his 'best friend'. Keep in mind, as far as we know Lucius (or any other DE for that matter) doesn't know that Snape is working against LV now. Also, remember Draco is a spoiled brat. XP ~Cassie~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From abush at maine.rr.com Tue Nov 11 01:05:54 2003 From: abush at maine.rr.com (kyliemckenzie1225) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:05:54 -0000 Subject: can house elves apparate in Hogwarts? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84566 kylie: I have resurrected this question since this subject still bothers me...does anyone have an answer? in a previous post, samnanya remarked: Now me(kylie): This reminded me of a question I had while re-reading CoS. While Harry is in the hospital wing regrowing the bones in his arm, Dobby appears for a second time. When they are interrupted, we read " 'Dobby must go!' breathed the elf, terrified. There was a loud crack, and Harry's fist was suddenly clenched on thin air." We have read that this sound is supposedly connected to apparation, for instance, in Chapter 1 of OoP, after Harry is caught listening to the news, "Harry was sure that the cracking noise had been made by someone Apparating or Disapparating. It was exactly the sound Dobby the house-elf made when he vanished into thin air." so, my question is.....(okay, maybe I am missing something obvious, but...) are house-elves an exception to the rule that no one can apparate into or disapparate from within the grounds of Hogwarts? Is there a different kind of magic (i.e., not apparation) going on here? Can someone explain? thanks! kylie From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 00:35:35 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:35:35 -0000 Subject: A Sirius Question (Was: Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84567 > Alternatively, just to get people to *stop* hashing this one out, I'd > ask her, "Is Sirius dead as a doornail, NEVER to return in ANY > form?" > > [*I* am convinced the answer is "yes", so I wouldn't really waste my > one question on this, but that's just me.] > > Siriusly Snapey Susan To tie this in with the portrait thread, it's just possible that Harry could find and talk with a portrait of Sirius as he was before he was put into Azkaban. I doubt that will happen, though, given his strained relationship with his family. If such a portrait ever existed, Kreacher probably would have destroyed it on Mrs. Black's orders. I do hope we find out what's beyond the veil, though. Any thoughts on how that might be possible? Carol From dejjfan368 at aol.com Tue Nov 11 00:59:41 2003 From: dejjfan368 at aol.com (ebennet68) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:59:41 -0000 Subject: Which House Was Sirius In? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84568 Hello all. This is my first post and I must say how much I have enjoyed all of the discussion for the past few months. I have wondered about which house Sirius was in myself and came across a clue as I reread Goblet of Fire: This is Sirius talking about Snape: (US Edition, Chapter 27: Padfoot Returns, p. 531) "Ever since I found out Snape was teaching here, I've wondered why Dumbledore hired him. Snape's always been fascinated by the Dark Arts, he was famous for it at school. Slimy, oily, greasy-haired kid, he was," Sirius added, and Harry and Ron grinned at each other. "Snape knew more curses when he arrived at school than half the kids in seventh year, and he was part of a gang of Slytherins who nearly all turned out to be Death Eaters." My question is this: Why would Sirius refer to Snape as being part of a gang of Slytherins if Sirius was in Slytherin? Wouldn't he say that he was part of a gang, not specifying a house, if indeed Sirius was in Slytherin? This just seems like a clue to me that Sirius was not in Slytherin as some have posted previously. I think that he was in Gryffindor, as well as the rest of the Marauders. Just a thought, ebennet From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 01:03:43 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:03:43 -0000 Subject: Wormtail's silver hand (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84569 > Carol wrote: > > > There is no solid evidence that he's a vampire... I don't mean to be > > rude or dismissive, but I don't understand why anyone would want him > > to be a vampire. What is the attraction of this theory? > > Me: > > I myself am not atttracted to the idea of Snape beng a vampire, and I > really hope he is not :-) The only "real" clue for him being a > vampire (or a "half vampire") is as I see it the interesting little > detail that Lupin assigned a vampire-essay to be written by the > class, after Snape had made them write an essay about werewolves > clearly wanting someone to discover Lupin's identity (the only one > who did was Hermione)... It could be Lupin's way of "getting back" at > Snape, and it might not. But it would be just like Rowling to leave a > clue like that in the text :-) > > Berit On the other hand, assigning a vampire essay would shift the focus away from werewolves (and himself). Also the class may well have found monsters on the level of hinkypunks rather mundane after reading about werewolves (if anyone besides Hermione actually did the assignment. I would have!) The assignment could throw the reader off the track as well, making Snape's assignment seem like nothing more than an attempt to discredit Lupin as a teacher who isn't pushing his students hard enough (which is how Snape himself presented it). Anyway, if Lupin's assignment of a vampire essay is the only clue, I think the theory is on pretty shaky ground. It looks like a red herring to me. Carol From drednort at alphalink.com.au Tue Nov 11 01:17:44 2003 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:17:44 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: <007501c3a7cc$cbdaffc0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> Message-ID: <3FB0D368.24860.41A4378@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 84570 On 10 Nov 2003 at 15:54, Taryn Kimel wrote: > Arya: > 2) Explain the Prefect and HeadBoy/Girl thing at Hogwarts. (Frankly, > I wish a lot more of the questions asked to her were less specific > such as this--not a specific yes/no question but just asking for an > explanation. Explain in what sense? Because I think this question would need to be asked in more detail or JKR would be confused by it. It's a fairly common thing in British schools that doesn't need specific explanation - so are you looking for special and specific info? Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From bumbledor at charter.net Mon Nov 10 16:02:14 2003 From: bumbledor at charter.net (Bumbledor) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 11:02:14 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint by having him not? References: Message-ID: <007501c3a7a4$02031f20$6501a8c0@mac> No: HPFGUIDX 84571 ----- Original Message ----- From: "nibleswik" > Why does Snape hate Harry? Because he hated James and Harry reminds > him of James. Following that, shouldn't Snape despise Draco? I mean, > Harry's father was an asshole to Snape, but Draco's dad is a DE! And > Snape's the anti-DE, in some ways, more than DD is. I think Snape's > the ultimate anti-DE because he went through it; the most fervent > are often those who experienced that which they're fighting against. > But in any case, Snape's waging a war against Lucius, yet Draco's > his favorite? What the hell?! Ever hear of the saying, Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer? Perhaps by keeping Draco as a "pet", hes in fact, ensuring that Lucious continues to think that Snape is still in the Dark Lords service, and that Lucious sees Snapes actions of being extreamly friendly to his son, as proof of that. Its part of the "we take care of our own syndrome." Bumbledore From greatraven at hotmail.com Tue Nov 11 01:54:03 2003 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:54:03 -0000 Subject: Ogg the Gamekeeper In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84572 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkittyhawk97" wrote: > Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Hagrid said he got the > Gamekeeper job after he was kicked out of Hogwarts (maybe right > after, a year after - that sort of time frame) > Well, I though it a bit strange that Mrs. Weasley at the end of GoF > was reminiscing about the gamekeeper that came before Hagrid (Ogg). > Wouldn't that mean she (and, of course, Arthur) were at school with > Tom Riddle, Hagrid and Myrtle, or even *before* them? > ___nkittyhawk, who doesn't believe in flints. Sue B: Maybe he was assistant to the gamekeeper? He was - what? - thirteen when he was kicked out? This would, IMO, be just a bit too young for the job. Even a year later would be way too young. Or maybe it really *was* a flint. :-) From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Tue Nov 11 01:58:24 2003 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 20:58:24 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint b... Message-ID: <25.409bb3f7.2ce19c40@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84573 In a message dated 11/10/2003 5:36:21 PM Pacific Standard Time, nibleswik at yahoo.com writes: > My point, though, is that if Snape has to choose between hating > James Potter's kid and hating Lucius Malfoy's, he'd choose Malfoy's. > Even if Snape hates Harry, he shouldn't favor Draco for hating Harry > when he should see Draco as worse. Why, though? Again I have to point out: Snape is friends with Lucius. Even if it is a false friendship or he's just using Lucius to get to LV for information, he's still friends with him (from what I/we can deduce from canon) Draco is a Slytherin. Snape favours his students in his house-Slytherin. It would be odd for him to single out and hate Draco. Maybe he does like Draco. We haven't really gotten into Severus's mind to know how he picks favourites other than the fact that they're in his alma mater. I think you are suggesting that Snape should hate Draco because his father is with LV, whom he is against. I must point out Snape's /supposed/ Double agent status. Maybe he does hate that little brat and loathes having to 'be nice' to him to keep in good with Lucius, but can't express that because he needs to be on the Malfoy's good side. Are you also suggesting that Snape should NOT hate Harry because his father with against LV, like Snape? This I don't buy. From what we've seen, Snape isn't the type to set aside personal vendetta's...even for 'the cause' ~Cassie-who just woke up and hopes this makes sense~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Tue Nov 11 01:35:00 2003 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (jazmyn) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:35:00 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape References: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE462611@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: <3FB03CC4.5080008@pacificpuma.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84574 Tonya Minton wrote: > Knowing now that Snape is a good guy playing double agent. What house > do you think he was in?? Slytherin. What in the world makes you think he was in any other house. He is the HEAD of Slytherin and we were already told about his being a 'part of a gang of Slytherins that turned DE'. Jazmyn From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Tue Nov 11 01:44:15 2003 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (jazmyn) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 19:44:15 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Of course Snape is a Slytherin, was: Re: Snape References: Message-ID: <3FB03EEF.80906@pacificpuma.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84575 nibleswik wrote: >(SNIPPIES!) > it sing, "For instance, Slytherin / Took only pure-blood wizards / > Of great cunning, just like him" (OotP, p. 205)? Yes, it is the > second. Slytherins are supposed to be cunning, ambitious purebloods. > The three traits don't automatically spell out evilness. > > Cheekyweebisom > > Ton Riddle was Slytherin and not a pureblood. Slytherin himself no longer does the picking himself and I don't think the sorting hat cares if the person is pureblood as long as they are ambitious and cunning.. In fact, it wanted to put Harry in Slythrin too and Harry is not a pureblood, since his mother was muggleborn. Its a thought that the reason none of the Slytherin students came to Snape's rescue when James and Sirius tomented him is that, possibly, Snape is not a pureblood and the pureblood Slytherins snubbed him. Maybe he did really outstanding in his O.W.L.s after that point and the young DEs saw him as a tool/resource and decided to overlook his blood. Volde not being a pureblood either might have been drawn to Snape's need for revenge and hooked him in. Snape however, was too intelligent to not realize he was only being used and perhaps Dumbledore turned out to be the only REAL friend he could turn to. Jazmyn From greatraven at hotmail.com Tue Nov 11 02:08:30 2003 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 02:08:30 -0000 Subject: non-human students -- Where are they? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84576 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kneazelkid" wrote: > Am I tainted by the movie or is Flitwick not a human? If so, he was a > student at Hogwarts at one point (he's the head of his house) -- so > where are the other non-human students at Hogwarts? I know there has > been guessing about some students being part-something, none of them > are as outwardly something-else like Flitwick. Thoughts? > > kneazelkid Sue B No, you're not movie-tainted. Flitwick is described as "tiny" many times and squeaks in his high voice. But he doesn't *have* to be non- human. Warwick Davis, who played the role in the film, actually *is* that high and he is certainly human, even if the gent has been playing everything from an Ewok to Reepicheep the Narnian mouse! :-) It's my sad opinion that non-humans don't often study at Hogwarts. I could be wrong, of course, and missing a reference somewhere. There's Hagrid, of course, who is only half-human, but that wasn't well-known and think of the fuss that was made when the word got out! Or maybe we just aren't told about the young goblins and such who are in Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, etc.? Somehow I doubt it, though. From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 01:58:14 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 01:58:14 -0000 Subject: Passwords + Snape a Pure-bloodist In-Reply-To: <9onmbl+f073@eGroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84577 Here's my take on the pure-blood password issue. Kelly said in message 26565: >Even if prefect set it, I don't believe he/she would choose a >password >like 'pure-blood' unless he/she knew for sure the Head of House would >be okay with it. > >Kelly the Yarn Junkie I agree. Snape may appear to favor the Slytherins, but make no mistake none of them would want to cross him. I think that Snape, the DE spy, would want/have to allow his house to think he favors pure-bloods whether he truly feels that way or not. Remember, they are reporting back to their parents what goes on at Hogwarts. We know Draco goes on at length about what happens at Hogwarts. dasienko at e... said in message 26574: >The HoH may not even know the changing passwords. Any professor may >have to get into any of the houses, so that there must be >a "skeleton" >password for all faculty members. Kelly replied back in message 26598: >To which, I reply: >I'm afraid I have to completely disagree with this theory. Since >McGonagall herself *very* rarely enters the Gryffindor common room -- >Harry comments on this -- I just can't believe other professors would >EVER have reason. >Kelly the Yarn Junkie I agree with the idea all professors at Hogwarts have a master "skeleton" password as well. Either that or the common rooms are simply set to allow them in without one. For security reasons, the professors need to be able to access the dorms. What if there was a fight? How would the professors get in to break it up? Not to mention, other emergencies such as a threat to Hogwarts/the students. Considering the times the WW is in, I'm sure the professors have access. Although McGonagall, doesn't come in to the Gryffindor commmon room very often that doesn't mean she can't. Above, I typed "professors" not HoH. I do not believe this access is limited to the HoH either. By the way, my memory could be wrong, but in CoS doesn't someone comment that whoever stole the diary had to be a Gryffindor and then someone added something like if it was a student. If my memory is correct, then that exchange would prove that the *students* at least think the staff has access. Speaking of staff, what about Filch, shouldn't the care taker have access to the whole premises? I don't like that thought by the way, but it would stand to reason. (I really hope he doesn't. I don't like Filch.) Also, I would think the headmaster/headmistress would have access everywhere. So, there has to be a master password or some kind of enchantment that gives professors including the headmaster/headmistress access. They simply may not have had reason to use it. On that note though, do all professors have access to both the boys' and girls' dorms. I would think yes and cite my above password argument, however I would think the alarm that Ron encountered would go off. Male professors could access the girls' dorm (not get thrown back down the stairs), but the alarm would let everyone know a male professor was in the dorm. From twinslove at mindspring.com Tue Nov 11 10:33:57 2003 From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:33:57 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ask the Question References: Message-ID: <002401c3a83f$53339000$3e1ba8c0@cbunited.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84578 This may be a bit OT but I was wondering - what if..... What if you all could attend a press-meeting with Rowling right now - and you were allowed to ask her just one single question about the books (the 5 already out - or the 2 to come) - what would you ask her? I would like to know two things: 1. Now that the prophecy has been heard and we know that Harry will most likely fight the final battle, why isn't Dumbledore and company training him to be a better wizard? I mean, that is a huge weight on a young man's shoulder, and we know he is a good wizard but the Dark Lord is more powerful. 2. I read a theory on the internet and would be curious to know if Harry and James could be heirs to Gryffindor? Of course, this could give away too much. :-) Kimberly From twinslove at mindspring.com Tue Nov 11 10:35:54 2003 From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:35:54 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Riddle = Slytherin? References: Message-ID: <002e01c3a83f$98c41860$3e1ba8c0@cbunited.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84579 Many have suggested that Harry's green eyes could mean that he was related to Slytherin. If only the "Heir of Slytherin" can open/find the chamber, both of which only Harry and Riddle did, could that mean that Harry is also an Heir of Slytherin?>> Hi. New to the list... this always confused me, because didn't Ginny open the chamber? Granted Riddle used her to open the chamber, but where does this "rule" come into place? Also, since it was already preciously opened by Riddle, couldn't anyone who knows how to talk "snake" know how to open the chamber? Just curiuos Kimberly From twinslove at mindspring.com Tue Nov 11 10:12:13 2003 From: twinslove at mindspring.com (Kimberly Roth) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:12:13 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Questions to ponder References: Message-ID: <001801c3a83c$49c42000$3e1ba8c0@cbunited.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84580 Two questions to ponder for fun: (One)What do you think Dudley heard when the dementors came after him at the beginning of OotP? and (Two) How did other muggle-born wizards learn where to buy their school supplies and how to get onto Platform 9 and 3/4 once they received their Hogwarts' letters? Harry would not have known how to do any of this without Hagrid or the chance meeting with the Weasley family. How did Hermione or Colin Creevey manage? Or better yet, how did Hermione or other muggle born wizards know or learn about Hogwarts and how do they convince their parents to let them go to school there? I mean, if muggles do not know about the magical world, why would they so willingly send their children to a wizard school vs regular school? Kimberly *who is new the list and trying to figure it all out. :-) From eiffelangel at hotmail.com Mon Nov 10 21:05:18 2003 From: eiffelangel at hotmail.com (eiffelangel) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 21:05:18 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: <007501c3a7cc$cbdaffc0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84581 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Taryn Kimel" wrote: > Inge: > > What if you all could attend a press-meeting with Rowling right > now - and you were allowed to ask her just one single question about > the books (the 5 already out - or the 2 to come) - what would you ask > her? > > >1) How is Peter Pettigrew going to repay his dept to Harry for > saving his life? > > Arya: > 2) Explain the Prefect and HeadBoy/Girl thing at Hogwarts. (Frankly, > I wish a lot more of the questions asked to her were less specific > such as this--not a specific yes/no question but just asking for an > explanation. > > Taryn: > 3) What House(s) were MWPP in? > Emma: 4) Is Sirius really dead? (maybe I'm beating a dead horse [no pun intended], but I keep hoping that he will come back- he was so cool!) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 00:37:17 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:37:17 -0000 Subject: Never tickle a sleeping dragon WAS: Caput Draconis In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84582 > Hermowninny wrote: > > > I don't see two hands here. What about *personal responsibility*? > > If you don't want to get arrested, don't do anything illegal! The > > blame lies solely on Lucius for his willing involvement in illegal > > activities. > > Me (Berit): > > Sorry for not being clear, but that is what I was saying too :-) The > only one responsible for Lucius's prison sentence is himself, and the > one responsible for Sirius's death is not Snape, but Harry (and to > some extent Dumbledore since he didn't fill him in). You might want to add Bellatrix to your list. :-) Carol From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 11 03:04:49 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 03:04:49 -0000 Subject: Sorting Hat song in SS/PS--does it mean anything? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84583 Good evening, all. I'm currently in a re-read of SS, and as I read the sorting hat's song, something bugged me. There's a very nice little rhythm going as the hat begins to tell about each house. You might belong in Gryffindor, Where dwell the brave of heart, Their daring, nerve, and chivalry Set Gryffindors apart. [p. 118, US ed.] We have line 1 w/ 8 syllables, line 2 w/ 6 syllables, line 3 w/ 8 syllables line 4 w/ 6 syllables. Hufflepuff is next, with essentially the same rhythm, though only if you "slur" the two syllables of "loyal". You might belong in Hufflepuff, Where they are just and loyal, Those patient Hufflepuffs are true And unafraid of toil. Even with that "problem", it still flows nicely, n'est-ce pas? Next up is Ravenclaw, which again flows pretty smoothly, with 8,6,7,6 syllables: Or yet in wise old Ravenclaw, If you've a ready mind, Where those of wit and learning, Will always find their kind. But then we hit Slytherin, where suddenly the pattern is "way off"-- I mean "listen" to how this sounds-- Or perhaps in Slytherin You'll make your real friends, Those cunning folk use any means To achieve their ends. 7 syllables, 5 syllables, 8 syllables, 5 syllables. It just doesn't fit at all, and it is awkward to say. Has this been discussed before? Is this something intentional on JKR's part--something designed to show us that Slytherin is slightly "off"? Or did she really have a hard time finding words to fit the general pattern and that fit in smoothly with the rest? I invite you to read all four stanzas together and see if you don't notice what I'm saying. Smooth X 3...then the awkward Slytherin stanza. Okay. Call me weird! ;-) Siriusly Snapey Susan From EnsTren at aol.com Tue Nov 11 04:32:43 2003 From: EnsTren at aol.com (EnsTren at aol.com) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 23:32:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Riddle = Slytherin? Message-ID: <7D3F9035.33B9E1B2.00170183@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84584 In a message dated 11/10/2003 5:09:24 PM Eastern Standard Time, "kateydidnt2002" writes: >I would call the sorting-hat's words a generalization. I doubt that >in the thousand or so years Hogwarts has been open that there has >*never* been a half blood or muggle born in slytherin. In books one >through four Slytherin is described as cunning, using any means to >achieve their own ends and such. *That* is the main criteria for >Slytherin house, and pureblood is a second consideration. It is my >thought that Tom Riddle's slytherin characteristics outweighed the >drawback of him being a halfblood. > > >Kateydidnt > I had a thought that perhaps the definition of "pureblood" has changed over the ages. Words do that, you know. Like in Salazars time it could have been unilinial. One wizard parent means your pure blood. Which would explain Tom's Sorting and Harry's Almost Sorting. Also, who knows how many generations it has to be, I remember in Book2 there was a mention of nine generations of "Witches and Warlocks" Nemi From zanelupin at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 04:38:54 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:38:54 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84585 Jen Reese would ask JKR: > 2) What *really* happened that fateful night in Godric's Hollow, the night the Potters died?< I really want to know this one, too. But I would never ask such a question unless it had not been answered to my satisfaction after book 7. I wouldn't wan't to spoil the fun. I'd probably ask something about how the Fidelius Charm functions, for instance, was the charm broken once Lily and James died? Or perhaps whether the pensieve is truly objective Or, on a completely different note, did Lupin kill Sirius? KathyK From smaragdina5 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 05:38:04 2003 From: smaragdina5 at yahoo.com (smaragdina5) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 05:38:04 -0000 Subject: Third time's the charm (was: Re: luna equals silver) In-Reply-To: <004501c3a7e5$7433b140$7ad21e43@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84586 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" wrote: > I actually did a speech for a class once on the three major methods to kill > a traditional vampire... Thank you for this interesting elaboration! One thing I've seen no one bring up over the years: what about the premise that a person must be bitten three times before dying and becoming a vampire themself?? There has been suggestions about dhampires, half-vampires... but what about someone who was bitten only once? I think there was one tale where they get vampiric influences but still walk around acting human. Maybe Snape was bitten once by Florence, or whatever... >;) smaragdina5 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 02:42:28 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 02:42:28 -0000 Subject: Of course Snape is a Slytherin In-Reply-To: <3FB03EEF.80906@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84587 Jazmyn wrote: > Its a thought that the reason none of the Slytherin students came to > Snape's rescue when James and Sirius tomented him is that, possibly, > Snape is not a pureblood and the pureblood Slytherins snubbed him. > Maybe he did really outstanding in his O.W.L.s after that point and the > young DEs saw him as a tool/resource and decided to overlook his blood. > Volde not being a pureblood either might have been drawn to Snape's > need for revenge and hooked him in. Snape however, was too intelligent > to not realize he was only being used and perhaps Dumbledore turned out > to be the only REAL friend he could turn to. > > Jazmyn My impression is that the gang of Slytherins didn't come to Snape's rescue because they were no longer at Hogwarts. Certainly Lucius Malfoy wasn't; he's five or six years older than Snape. In fact, Snape seems to have been a loner as a teenager, or so the Pensieve moment where he's shooting down flies suggests. I don't think we have any indication that Snape is not a "pure blood." He wouldn't have called Lily a "mud blood" if his own heritage were questionable. I do think that the DEs, especially Malfoy, later took advantage of his intellectual gifts and skill with the dark arts, not to mention his desire for revenge, but I don't think they would have left him hanging upside down in front of the whole school if they'd been present, or that James would have dared to do it if a gang of very sinister Slytherins were anywhere near by. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 02:54:02 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 02:54:02 -0000 Subject: non-human students -- Where are they? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84588 "kneazelkid" wrote: > > Am I tainted by the movie or is Flitwick not a human? > > Sue B wrote: > No, you're not movie-tainted. Flitwick is described as "tiny" many > times and squeaks in his high voice. But he doesn't *have* to be non- > human. Warwick Davis, who played the role in the film, actually *is* > that high and he is certainly human, even if the gent has been > playing everything from an Ewok to Reepicheep the Narnian mouse! :-) I think the movie has misled (I won't say "tainted") kneazelkid. Look at the Creevey brothers. Colin is referred to as "little" and Dennis as "tiny," yet they're muggle-born wizards and therefore human. I think Professor Flitwick is also human (though probably not muggle born). There's no indication of his being anything other than a very small wizard. I think that the casting, or rather the makeup that makes Warwick Davis look like some sort of gnome, is very misleading. I picture Filius Flitwick as looking like a tiny, white-bearded Merlin with the height and body proportions of a slender nine-year-old. Carol From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 04:50:59 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 04:50:59 -0000 Subject: non-human students -- Where are they? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84589 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sbursztynski" Sbursztynski wrote: > No, you're not movie-tainted. Flitwick is described as "tiny" many > times and squeaks in his high voice. But he doesn't *have* to be non- > human. True. I'd wondered about that and about Flitwick. Recently, I had been talking to some friends about kids that were half-something-other-than human attending Hogwarts. We know that wizards do "mingle" with other magical creatures. Fleur and Hagrid are examples of this. I always thought it was a "don't ask, don't tell" kind of thing, since everyone knows what a big deal some people make about half-breeds like Hagrid. I also thought that what you were mixed with would make the difference as well. In GoF, when Fleur says her grandmother was a veela, I didn't see a big ruckus breakout and the press was there too, but when Hagrid is revealed to be part giant the article causes Hagrid to hide in his cabin. I don't have "Fantastic Beasts..." with me right now, however if I recall correctly giants are portrayed as pretty blood thirsty, then again Veela don't come off as cuddly either. Why didn't Fleur get more flak? I have some ideas about that, but it keeps coming down to some kind of arbitrary standard. Sbursztynski wrote: > It's my sad opinion that non-humans don't often study at Hogwarts. I > could be wrong, of course, and missing a reference somewhere. There's > Hagrid, of course, who is only half-human, but that wasn't well- known > and think of the fuss that was made when the word got out! > > Or maybe we just aren't told about the young goblins and such who are > in Gryffindor, Ravenclaw, etc.? Somehow I doubt it, though. Hogwarts was founded by witches and wizards for witches and wizards. Hogwarts doesn't educate non-humans. There have been students who were mixed with other species, but they were at least part-human. I had assumed that houseelves, centaurs, goblins, etc. educated their young in their own way. Their worlds appear to be very different from the WW and so, their education would need to be different too. Think about the law: "No non-human creature is permitted to carry or use a wand." Non-humans couldn't study at hogwarts. For the magic taught at Hogwarts, a wand is required. Hogwarts teaches humans "human magic" perhaps non-magical creatures' magic is different. Houseelves', goblins', and centaurs' magic appears to work very differently. Wouldn't they need completely different curriculums? Also, houseelves and centaurs appear to have different concerns and ways of thinking from wizards. The way the WW and their worlds currently stand, non-humans would need a curriculum better suited to their magic and culture than Hogwarts. Yolanda From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 05:23:45 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 05:23:45 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84590 > > Hermowninny: > > I don't think JKR ever said James was in Gryffindor in an > interview. > > The closest thing I can find is when she was asked "Whiat position > > did James play on the Gryffindor Quidditch team?" She > > responded, "James was a chaser." That is neither confirmation or > > denial of his house association. > > Yolanda said: True. Now we have to ask ourselves would/should JKR have corrected > the interviewer about James's house if the interview had said the > wrong one. > > Also, why did the interview think James was in Gryffindor? Was this > because of an answer to a previous question? Hermowninny: Here's a link to the whole interview. http://www.the-leaky- cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/1000-scholastic-chat.htm I didn't see anything that would make the intrviewer assume James was in Gryffindor. If the house James was in plays a role in an upcoming book, then she would not have told. As secretive as she is, I can't see her ruining a plot device. She told the truth, but perhaps not the whole truth. Yolanda: Incidentally, this still isn't canon, but wouldn't Harry know what > house his Dad was in. In PS/SS McGonagall said Harry's dad was "an > excellent Quidditch player". This part is speculation, but I would > imagine that Harry would have at some point gone in to the trophy > room and seen his Dad's name on a trophy or two. > > More speculation, what about the photo album Hagid gave Harry?. The > book doesn't describe all the photos in the album. Since his parents > died fairly young, some pictures could have been from their Hogwarts' > days. There could have been photos of James in the Gryffindor common > room. Also, if his Dad was in his quidditch robes, then his house > will be obvious. Sportting attire always marks the teams. I'm sure > their quidditch robes have the house colors and/or mascots. > > Although, it isn't canon and I realize we have to be wary of Harry's > POV, I think JKR was telling us James's house in that statement. > Hermowninny: I don't necessarily think Harry would know. He may have assumed, but there is no canon to say he knows for sure. In COS (sorry, don't have my book) he thinks he could perhaps be the heir of Slytherin, he admits not know anything about his father or his family. But then, he doesn't do anything to find out--doesn't ask questions, doesn't surf the internet for his family tree:) *Why* won't Harry ask these questions?! I for one would really like the answers. I believe it's *possible* JKR is leading us to believe James was in Gryffindor, when he may not have been. If he was in fact in Gryffindor, wouldn't she just come out and say it? Why does all the evidence skirt around the subject? -Hermowninny From mschelleau at yahoo.com.au Tue Nov 11 05:34:13 2003 From: mschelleau at yahoo.com.au (mschelleau) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 05:34:13 -0000 Subject: Tur-bans or Too-Much (was Re: Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84591 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Inge wrote: > > > I think it might be quite fun to make a list of questions for > [Rowling] . . . to find out the variaty of questions that > > each of you are dying to ask if you got the chance - knowing that > > she'd give you the answer. > > > > It's not easy to pick just 1 question - but let me be the one to > > start by saying: > > > > 1) How is Peter Pettigrew going to repay his dept to Harry for > > saving his life? > > And Carol responded: > To begin with, I want to know what she meant by saying (in answer to > why she made Quirrell rather than Snape the villain in SS/PS), "I > know all about Snape and he'd never put on a turban." (Huh? Does > that mean he'd never let another person manipulate his will by > getting literally or figuratively inside his head? If not, what the > heck does it mean?) Well, the psychological implications of Quirrel's choice of headwear are interesting, especially given turbans were popular with the more 'mystical' set circa 19th century (AFAIK) such as mediums, and I do wonder if JKR had that in mind when devising the character of Quirrel who was a link (a medium if you will) between LV and life and death. However, I think JKR's comment above was more a general humorous observation about Snape's aesthetic sensibilities in that Snape would most likely think a turban (a) served no useful function and (b) was self-indulgent posturing (harkening back to their use by mystics within a western context and not a comment on those cultures where such headwear has a different meaning). Now, if the turban was black and flowing .... naah - if he had to go for a head covering he'd go for a hooded cape (functional whilst still retaining a significant billowing quotient) Mschelle in Au From ayers185 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 06:16:35 2003 From: ayers185 at yahoo.com (ayers185) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 06:16:35 -0000 Subject: Ogg the Gamekeeper In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84592 ___nkittyhawk, who doesn't believe in flints, wrote: > Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Hagrid said he got the > Gamekeeper job after he was kicked out of Hogwarts (maybe right > after, a year after - that sort of time frame) > Well, I though it a bit strange that Mrs. Weasley at the end of GoF > was reminiscing about the gamekeeper that came before Hagrid (Ogg). > Wouldn't that mean she (and, of course, Arthur) were at school with > Tom Riddle, Hagrid and Myrtle, or even *before* them? It is quite impossible, in my opinion, to assume that Hagrid just one day took over the job, leaving his predecessor out of a job. What makes more sense is that Hagrid was apprenticed to Ogg until such time as he was ready to take o'er the job himself. "ayers185" From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Mon Nov 10 23:52:48 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 17:52:48 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Nicolas Flamel is real References: Message-ID: <004a01c3a7e5$bfcc6a20$7ad21e43@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84593 > Nineve. > > JKR fans might be impressed (as i was) to find out that Nicollas > Flamel is in fact a real alchemist. > I was doing a research about colors in the library (not the restricted > section) and stumbled by a book that actually mentioned him and his > alchemy work. It was only a mention, together with some other > alchemists' names, but I was thrilled! > It might be worth checking him up if anyone wants to do a more in > depth research. > Thought you would like to know. Iggy here: You can also e-mail me directly and I can not only send you files of information on him, I can also refer you to a number of sites directly. (I had a reason a while back to research Nicholas Flamel, and still have a large chunk of the information archived.) Iggy McSnurd From HimemyaUtena at aol.com Tue Nov 11 05:42:54 2003 From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 00:42:54 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Caput Draconis, WAS: Re: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series Message-ID: <76A8B9B1.379F8047.1E595A1B@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84594 In a message dated 11/9/2003 10:19:54 PM Eastern Standard Time, sydenmill at msn.com writes: > Caput Draconis: > Caput: Kaput -- "utterly defeated or destroyed; made > useless or > unable to function." {The Merriam-Webster Dictionary}) > And, Draconis: Draco (n) is. Hmmm...interesting. However, I believe "Caput" in latin means "head". I'm not sure, but I'm thinking it's head as in head of a company, but I could be wrong, it could be head as in the body part. Adrianna From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 05:52:59 2003 From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 05:52:59 -0000 Subject: Questions to ponder In-Reply-To: <001801c3a83c$49c42000$3e1ba8c0@cbunited.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84595 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kimberly Roth" wrote: > > -JJPandy: > (Two) How did other muggle-born wizards learn where to buy their > school supplies and how to get onto Platform 9 and 3/4 once they > received their Hogwarts' letters? Harry would not have known how to > do any of this without Hagrid or the chance meeting with the Weasley > family. How did Hermione or Colin Creevey manage? > > Or better yet, how did Hermione or other muggle born wizards know or learn about Hogwarts > and how do they convince their parents to let them go to school there? I mean, if muggles do > not know about the magical world, why would they so willingly send their children to a wizard > school vs regular school? > > Kimberly *who is new the list and trying to figure it all out. :-) psychobirdgirl(me): I think that maybe they get an extra letter and maybe a visit from someone like McG or Dumbledore. Can you imagine someone turning down sensible McG when she shows up for tea, or not being persuaded by Dumbledore when he shows them what their child can be. I think they make visits earlier in the summer but didn't send someone to Harry because they thought that the Dursley's would understand; they did know Petunia before, so maybe they assumed she could help him. psychobirdgirl From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 05:40:46 2003 From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 05:40:46 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84596 > Notice the "naturally." She states elsewhere that Hagrid was in > Gryffindor, also with a "naturally." Gryffindor is her favorite house > (Oct. 16 interview) > Carol psychobirdgirl(me): I thought that Hagrid was a Hufflepuff? psychobirdgirl From nibleswik at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 06:43:08 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 06:43:08 -0000 Subject: Slytherin Sirius?, was: Of course Snape is a Slytherin Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84597 > > > Knowing now that Snape is a good guy playing double agent. What > > house > > > do you think he was in?? Cheekyweebisom: > > Slytherin, obviously. I'll say it AGAIN: Slytherin =/= evil. Tonya: > I wasn't trying to be smart.... I have been enjoying all > the "House" > discussions. I really thought that Black was a Slytherin and now > after > all these wonderful posts I am not sure. I was also sure that > Snape was > a Slytherin. Although I have not found canon to back that up!! > I think that good wizards can and do come from Slytherin. Me (Cheekyweebisom): Oh, sure. I'm sorry if I seemed brusque; the "Slytherins are ESE!" statements really get to me, though. It just seems SO simplistic. I'm interested in why so many people think/thought Sirius was a Slytherin. I don't get it at all: he's not particularly cunning or ambitious, though he IS very, very brave (and is described as such by DD himself), he was best friends with James, and his mother hates him. These all seem to point to Gryffindor, don't they? What points to Slytherin? I'm very curious. Cheekyweebisom From belijako at online.no Tue Nov 11 08:54:31 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 08:54:31 -0000 Subject: Wormtail's silver hand (was: Thoughts on Wormtail's activities in OOTP ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84598 Carol wrote: > Anyway, if Lupin's assignment of a vampire essay is the only clue, I > think the theory is on pretty shaky ground. It looks like a red > herring to me. Me: Also: If Lupin really did assign a vampire-essay to reveal Snape being one, Hermione would almost certainly know he is one, wouldn't she :-) But Hermione has never voiced any suspicions about it to Ron and Harry. I can't see why she would hold back information like that. She did with Lupin, but that was different since she believed he was inheritedly good. I know she chooses to believe Dumbledore who says Snape can be trusted, but would she keep a secret like Snape being a vampire from her best friends? Berit From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au Mon Nov 10 23:48:51 2003 From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:48:51 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Nicolas Flamel is real References: Message-ID: <000201c3a833$a2a29bb0$69984cca@Monteith> No: HPFGUIDX 84599 > JKR fans might be impressed (as i was) to find out that Nicollas > Flamel is in fact a real alchemist. > I was doing a research about colors in the library (not the restricted > section) and stumbled by a book that actually mentioned him and his > alchemy work. It was only a mention, together with some other > alchemists' names, but I was thrilled! > It might be worth checking him up if anyone wants to do a more in > depth research. > Thought you would like to know. > Nineve. I have several page on Nicholas Flamel in my Book (disc, actually, but hey!). It's quite long but if anyone is interested I can add it to the 'files' or something. Nox From koo at uk.ibm.com Tue Nov 11 09:24:31 2003 From: koo at uk.ibm.com (prongsnpadfoot) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:24:31 -0000 Subject: Neville and the Cruciatus curse Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84600 Hi all, Checked the archive and I don't think this has been asked before but apologises if it has .. I've just re-read OOTP for the nth time and, re-reading the section when Harry performs the Cruciatus curse on Bellatrix, this just takes the wind out of her sails. She then retorts with "you've never performed an unforgivable curse before - righteous anger is not enough, and instead you have to really mean it." Sorry cannot remember the exact quote -don't have the book to hand. If Neville was capable of speech and had performed the curse instead, what do you think would have happen? Would he have had more effect, after all she had just performed the curse on him, plus there is definitely bitterness and a lot of hatred at what she did to his parents? Could this have been enough for Neville to inflict some serious pain on Bellatrix or would he have just caused the same level of pain as Harry? Even with the anger within him, I personally don't think Neville would have caused more then perhaps a longer "moment of pain" for Bellatrix (compared to Harry) but not the agonising levels the curse can produce. Anyone else have a view? Cheers, Dan From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 11 09:42:32 2003 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:42:32 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Responsability for Sirius's Death Message-ID: <20031111094232.86869.qmail@web25104.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84601 Hi All I read a lot about who is believed to be responsible for Sirisus dieing. Of course the blame is shared is shared, I have compiled a list of the usual suspects and some mabee not so usual. I have put them in what I believe to be ranking order. Please let me know what you think 1) Voldemort : Obviously 2) Bellatrix Lestrange : she fired the shot 3) Kretcher : If he had done his job and brought Sirius to talk to Harry, end of problem. 4) Sevrus Snape : for IMO not even attempting to teach Harry Occlumency. If you want to teach a 15 year old, to play Tennis you don't hire Rudedski and Phillipousis (excuse the spelling for bot of those) to serve aces at him in the hope that he might learn something. 5) Dumbledore : For the same reason he blames himself OOTP UK starting page728 I don't blame Harry at all. He is only 15and there are adults(?) around him who are supposed to protect him and not, as in the case of Snape, to use him as a target for their own spite. Udder Pendragon --------------------------------- Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 11 09:56:57 2003 From: sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk (sachmet96) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:56:57 -0000 Subject: uniforms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84602 > Yolanda > They don't wear house specific markings. Remember in CoS when Harry > and Ron disguised as Slytherins asked a girl where the Slytherin > common room was and she said she was in Ravenclaw. They never could > have mistaken a student from one house for another if they wore > markings. They wouldn't have had to guess who was a Slytherin in the > first place. House markings would have solved that problem easily. sachmet96 I just reread the passage and she sounded to me that she thought they were stupid to even assume she was Slytherin which implies to me that it must have been obvious she was a Ravenclaw. I still think there are markings on the robes true it isn't said in the books that there are markings but it also isn't said that there aren't. As it never says plain robes, except in the Hogwart letters and that means that the markings are attached later (after the sorting). Also I find it hard to believe that Harry and friend could recognise students from different houses (like pointed out in previous posts), like a group of Slytherins, even when they are eating with them nearly every day. And Ginny did introduce Luna as a Ravenclaw if students were able to tell what house others are in simply by the looks than that would have not been necessary, esp. as Luna seems to be an easy recogniseable person. And how are professors to distinguish first year students to deduct/award points. I can't believe they have such a good memory to recognise every single first year student after only a few days to do that. And what about teachers who don't teach all students (like the ones from the elective classes?) are they going to ask what house the student is in and then deduct points? I find that hard to believe and it would be easy for the student to lie wouldn't it? In my school we had over 1000 students and about 90 teachers and esp. when I was in a higher class I wasn't able to distinguis the lower class students anymore (I simply didn't pay any attention to them) and same goes for students of different classes in the same year. I knew they were in my year but I couldn't name which class. My primary school was a half boarding school so all students had meals together and there were only about 200 students and I could also not say in which class who was (neither could the teachers btw.). So from personal experience I would say that there must be a distinguishing feature on which the teachers can recognise the house the student is in simply to deduct/award points. So that's why I believe there are some markings on the uniforms. From sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 11 10:10:09 2003 From: sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk (sachmet96) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:10:09 -0000 Subject: Responsability for Sirius's Death In-Reply-To: <20031111094232.86869.qmail@web25104.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84603 > Udder Pendragon: > Hi All > I read a lot about who is believed to be responsible for Sirisus dieing. Of course the blame is shared is shared, I have compiled a list of the usual suspects and some mabee not so usual. I have put them in what I believe to be ranking order. > Please let me know what you think > 1) Voldemort : Obviously > 2) Bellatrix Lestrange : she fired the shot > 3) Kretcher : If he had done his job and brought Sirius to talk to Harry, end of problem. > 4) Sevrus Snape : for IMO not even attempting to teach Harry Occlumency. If you want to teach a 15 year old, to play Tennis you don't hire Rudedski and Phillipousis (excuse the spelling for bot of those) to serve aces at him in the hope that he might learn something. > 5) Dumbledore : For the same reason he blames himself OOTP UK starting page728 > > I don't blame Harry at all. He is only 15and there are adults(?) around him who are supposed to protect him and not, as in the case of Snape, to use him as a target for their own spite. sachmet96 Number first to blame is Sirius himself. He knew that he shouldn't leave the house and did it repeatedly. So he is to blame for his own death imo. I wouldn't blame Harry (well not really, he bears a slight responisility in not listening to the adults who tried to protect him - how are they supposed to protect him when he does what he wants?), Snape (he didn't tell Sirius to leave the house, so how can he be responsible) or Dumbledore (who told Sirius not to leave the house). Ok, I know I maybe am not really objective as when I read Sirius dies my first thought was 'Oh, good it's him and not someone I like'. But I nontheless think it's mainly his own fault and Lestrange's. From patientx3 at aol.com Tue Nov 11 10:48:04 2003 From: patientx3 at aol.com (HunterGreen) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:48:04 -0000 Subject: Responsability for Sirius's Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84604 sachmet96: >>Number first to blame is Sirius himself. He knew that he shouldn't leave the house and did it repeatedly. So he is to blame for his own death imo.<< HunterGreen: Except that his orders had to do with his status as a wanted man, which nothing at all to do with his death. Dicentra put it very well in a post back in September (msg: 80172) >>Sirius didn't show up at the Ministry because he was stir-crazy, cocky, irresponsible, egotistical, or any of that; he showed up for the same reason all the others did: to save Harry et al. Even if Sirius's name had been cleared previous to the final confrontation, he would have shown up at the Ministry. Even if he'd never stepped foot in Twelve Grimmalud Place, he'd have been there. Even if he weren't Harry's godfather, he'd have helped save him. After all, Lupin, Tonks, Mad-Eye, and Shackelbolt don't have Sirius's particular character flaws, nor do they have the same connection to Harry, but they could just as easily have been killed as Sirius.<< HunterGreen: Personally, (other than Bellatrix-or whoever fired the second shot-, since they're the one who *literally* killed him), I think the fault lies mostly with DD and Harry and not at all with Snape. Yes, Snape didn't teach Harry occulmency, but Harry wasn't really trying was he? If DD had told Harry that VD wanted to lure him to the DoM, Harry might have been able to discount the dream, but he didn't, which is why he told Harry to blame him. -HunterGreen From kcawte at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 11 19:21:03 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:21:03 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Responsability for Sirius's Death References: Message-ID: <009d01c3a888$f5687c70$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84605 > sachmet96 > Number first to blame is Sirius himself. He knew that he shouldn't > leave the house and did it repeatedly. So he is to blame for his own > death imo. I wouldn't blame Harry (well not really, he bears a slight > responisility in not listening to the adults who tried to protect > him - how are they supposed to protect him when he does what he > wants?), Snape (he didn't tell Sirius to leave the house, so how can > he be responsible) or Dumbledore (who told Sirius not to leave the > house). Ok, I know I maybe am not really objective as when I read > Sirius dies my first thought was 'Oh, good it's him and not someone I > like'. But I nontheless think it's mainly his own fault and > Lestrange's. > > > Sirius was killed because he was on the'wrong side' as far as the DEs were concerned, not because he was Sirius Black. So if Lupin or Tonks or Dumledore had been killed in the same battle you'd be blaming them for being foolhardy would you? Harry is not at fault here, neither is Snape (because even if he'd continued the lessons it wouldn't have made a blind bit of difference imo because Harry wasn't interested in learning, partly due to Severus' teaching methods, but I don't think you can blame him for not having the skills to teach, and mainly because he *wanted* the connection) The person who holds 99% of the blame is Bellatrix. We are only responsible for our own actions in this world and no one (other than Trelawney apparently) is prescient so all we can do is make the best decision we can in the circumstances and then deal with the consequences. That's what Harry did, that's what Sirius did. Harry didn't drag Sirius (or any of the others there - yes we all knew they wouldn't just sit around and do nothing but they could have chosen to do so, they didn't). Harry chose to risk his life to try and rescue his godfather, Sirius chose to risk his to rescue Harry. Bellatrix chose to kill Sirius. The reason I say 99% of the blame and not 100% is that had Harry had all the facts at his disposal he wouldn't have made the choices he did, however as I just said we have to make the best decision we can and I'm sure that's what DD thought he was doing by keeping quiet - I really don't see how someone so supposedly intelligent could have misread everyone around him so badly, but he did. DD created the situation that made Sirius' death possible but life is all about our choices isn't it? (I seem to remember a certain long-haired wizard saying something along those lines to young Harry). Sirius *chose* to be there, Bella *chose* to kill him. btw and on the subject of 'how are the adults meant to protect him if he never listens' Albus doesn't seem to understand people at all, you can't just tell a child (especially one who has seen as much as Harry) don't do this, without providing any reason, and expect them to pay much attention. People listen to instructions much better if they know *why* they shouldn't do something. K From sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 11 11:53:45 2003 From: sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk (sachmet96) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:53:45 -0000 Subject: Responsability for Sirius's Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84606 > sachmet96: > >>Number first to blame is Sirius himself. He knew that he shouldn't > leave the house and did it repeatedly. So he is to blame for his own > death imo.<< > > HunterGreen: > Except that his orders had to do with his status as a wanted man, > which nothing at all to do with his death. Dicentra put it very well > in a post back in September (msg: 80172) > > >>Sirius didn't show up at the Ministry because he was stir-crazy, > cocky, irresponsible, egotistical, or any of that; he showed up for > the same reason all the others did: to save Harry et al. sachmet96: I don't see how this makes him not responsible for his own death. He knew not to leave the house but did it, the reason why he shouldn't leave it is unimportant imo. He left and dies, so it's his fault. If he hadn't died then his whereabouts would have been known and he would have endangered the people who where seen there with him (can't see the Ministry being happy to see it's people associate with an wanted man). So he didn't only endanger himself but others as well. That's irresponsible imo. If he didn't act from any of the above emotions then he was clearly lucid enough to think about why he shouldn't go and the consequences if he did. There were enough members of the Order going, did he think he could help Harry more than they could? And he was told to remain behind with the task to inform DD! Did he think this was not important (good) enough a task to do? He delegated it to Kreacher of all people, and DD had warned him that Kreacher could be dangerous to them. So again here he acts irresponsible and endangers others. So for me the blame lies with Sirius. Appart from that Snape contacted him to make sure he was at Grimmauld Place so Sirius would have known something was up and he shouldn't leave the house. > > like'. But I nontheless think it's mainly his own fault and > > Lestrange's. > > > > > Kathryn Cawte > Sirius was killed because he was on the'wrong side' as far as the DEs were > concerned, not because he was Sirius Black. So if Lupin or Tonks or > Dumledore had been killed in the same battle you'd be blaming them for being > foolhardy would you? sachmet96 No, because they had reason to be there, but Sirius hadn't. Indeed he had another task asigned to him (inform DD) but chose not to do it. If he had done as he was told and informed DD then DD would have been earlier at the Ministry (so he had to get the information out of Kreacher wasting time). DD played the deciding part in the fight, so what Sirius did was not only endangering himself but others. That was foolhardy and led to his death! If Lupin or anyone of the others had died it would have been because it was their job (an unlucky expression) not foolhardy. From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 11 11:05:32 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:05:32 -0000 Subject: Caput Draconis, WAS: Re: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: <76A8B9B1.379F8047.1E595A1B@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84607 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, HimemyaUtena at a... wrote: Adrianna: > Hmmm...interesting. However, I believe "Caput" in latin means "head". I'm not sure, but I'm thinking it's head as in head of a company, but I could be wrong, it could be head as in the body part. > Geoff: I've always found that, having done GCE O-level Latin years ago, knowledge of Latin is a surprisingly useful tool to possess. I've already commented on "caput" being "head" in Latin; it is definitely the head of the body in origin. We've had "caput draconis" - "dragon's head" (draconis is the Genetive from of draco) and,. as a member of the school choir many years ago, I remember at Christmas singing: caput apres defero, quod estis in convivio - the first line of the Boar's Head carol. You could say of our little ferret friend "Caput draconis magnus est" - Draco's head is big. Draw your own conclusions.... :-) Geoff From sandrranch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 08:07:14 2003 From: sandrranch at yahoo.com (S & R Ranch) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 08:07:14 -0000 Subject: Do Wizards Always...? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84608 Do wizards always make noise when they apparate and disapparate? I am asking because in book five everyone seems to me making noise when they do so. Also in several of the previous books you read about the noise...even Dobby the House Elf made a noise when he apparates and disapparates. Yet he simply appears in the hedge and Harry's bedroom on Privit Drive with no sound. I assume House Elfs have numerous abilities and one that would allow them to appear and vanish with out making a sound in order to perform their duties without disturbing the household. So I can see how Dobby can come and go with out making a sound if he chooses to do so. Yet when Hagrid disappears at the train station in book one there seem not to be any noise. I honestly don't know how someone of Hagrid's size could vanish as he did unless he disapparated. So I assume you can choose to either make or not make a sound when you apparate or disapparate. I would think one in the WW would need to be able to control this noise. What do you think? sandrranch From kcawte at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 11 20:36:08 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:36:08 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Responsability for Sirius's Death References: Message-ID: <000f01c3a893$8091bf00$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84609 ----- Original Message ----- From: "sachmet96" > sachmet96: > I don't see how this makes him not responsible for his own death. He > knew not to leave the house but did it, the reason why he shouldn't > leave it is unimportant imo. He left and dies, so it's his fault. If > he hadn't died then his whereabouts would have been known and he > would have endangered the people who where seen there with him Me (K) who was going to make his whereabouts known? Most of the DEs were escaed prisoners, Voldemort was trying to pretend he didn't existy. That leaves people like Lucius malfoy - who was in the building to try and kill Harry Potter - how exactly were they going to report it to the Ministry? He didn't run off in an irresponsible manner, he went with a well organized rescue party, organized btw by the very people you are saying didn't want him to leave the house, if they hadn't decided that it was OK for him to come he wouldn't have arrived with them he'd have arrived alone. The fact is that Sirius is Harry's godfather, the one thing he can still do for his best friend is look after Harry. In his mind (and to some extent in the minds of others - Dumbledore accepts permission slips from him, Molly wouldn't argue about Harry's welfare with him if she felt it wasn't his concern) he is responsible for Harry. it would have been irresponsible to let others go off and risk their lives to rescue him and sit at home himself doing nothing when he was (afawk) as capable as any of the others there and in no more danger than any of them. > Appart from that Snape contacted him to make sure he was at Grimmauld > Place so Sirius would have known something was up and he shouldn't > leave the house. > But Snape checked if he was there to see if Harry was right about him being a prisoner at the MoM not to check if he was being a good little boy. > > > sachmet96 > No, because they had reason to be there, but Sirius hadn't. Indeed he > had another task asigned to him (inform DD) but chose not to do it. > He had as much reason to be there as anyone else. Again he didn't run off without informing anyone where he was going - the rest of the rescue party knew he was there and if his staying behind had been as vital as you seem to think then either they would have insisted he do it or assigned someone else to do it. I would point out that you seem to think there were enough of them without him there but they didn't defeat the bad guys easily by overwhelming numbers, with one less person in the fight for the Order *more* people could have died. K From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Tue Nov 11 12:29:18 2003 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (jazmyn) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 06:29:18 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Of course Snape is a Slytherin References: Message-ID: <3FB0D61E.60508@pacificpuma.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84610 justcarol67 wrote: > (Snip) > seems to have been a loner as a teenager, or so the Pensieve moment > where he's shooting down flies suggests. I don't think we have any > indication that Snape is not a "pure blood." He wouldn't have called > Lily a "mud blood" if his own heritage were questionable. I do think (Snip) > Carol > > Voldemort calls people mudbloods all the time and he is not a pureblood. Just because Snape called Lily one doesn't mean he might not be one himself. There are hints to indicate he was not from a happy home and for some reason, I have doubts that an abusive father would last long in the WW as wizards seem a vindictive lot and either his mother would have cursed his father in time, if she were a Witch..or her relatives might. He might be a half blood, his abusive father needing a woman he could easily dominate and who might have been a muggle. Time will tell, I guess Jazmyn From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 11 13:19:38 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:19:38 +0000 Subject: Stereotyping Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84611 I'm feeling a bit sour. Not my usual sunny disposition, spreading sweetness and light everywhere. No song on my lips, no pat for the neighbour's moggies. Instead it's a snarl and a size nine. When I'm in this sort of mood, friends try and distract me with a pint or two, but of course that's not possible by internet. Pity. And what has brought me to this pass? I'll tell you. Stereotyping. By the posters. This post may not see the light of day - it all depends if I can keep it within the bounds of civility demanded by the Admin Elves; certainly I expect a lot of fans to disagree with it, that's not a problem. But I would be worried if no-one agreed with me. The antics in the Potterverse of various characters and groups have raised much comment from posters whenever they see a divergence from their own patterns of acceptable behaviour. That's to be lauded - in such circumstances comparisons are expected and welcome, it's all part of the fun and games of analysis (or even post facto rationalisation) inherent in a discussion group like ours. No problem so far. I start to get itchy when when posters start to flat-out tell JKR that she is wrong in what she writes and I become positively restive when, as in a post made recently, there is a comment to the effect that she's not quite as bad as was thought, but she must do better. Even with a *g* tacked onto the end of the paragraph this reads as verging on the pretentious and patronising. Posters, it seems, hate stereotyping - except when it's their own. Some are determined not to be happy unless JKR writes words that match their personal prejudices. Outbreaks of outrage occur every few weeks. All it takes is for some-one to decry Elvish degradation or sexism or gender typing or racism and the pot starts boiling again. Admittedly, the HP books are written from an English viewpoint and many of the readers may not appreciate the nuances of social structure and behaviour in this little island. But strangely, other books don't get the same treatment. When comparisons are made to other fantasies, fictions or even what some may consider philosophical or religious source books the same standards don't seem to be applied. Why is it that JKR seems to impel posters to leap onto their dearest hobby-horse? Sometimes I get the impression that there has been a long, detailed search of the canon just to find an instance where the poster can show how 'right-on' and stuffed with social rectitude their credentials are. The fact that this is a fictional construct and not to be taken seriously seems to have passed them by. They also joyfully ignore the premise that HP is set in the UK, which has a very different heritage and social history to their own society. OK, let's have a look at some of the more supposedly contentious issues. Elves seem to be a cause of regular angst with frequent fulminations against the evils of slavery. All well and good, but is it applicable? Slavery has never, ever been a significant part of English society; at least not since the Romans left. Delve into history and literature and it's quite difficult to find more than a few scattered examples of slavery within the UK. Slavery is not part of our tradition. Why then assume that JKR would add such a perversion to an essentially English story? Minority groups (religious or racial) form only a small part of English society. The largest 'groups' (of Asian and African origin and still only comprising about 3% of the population each) have nearly all arrived in the UK within my lifetime. They came as free individuals, usually for economic reasons; there was no compulsion. Whatever the experiences of their ancestors in other countries individuals who come to the UK have, for centuries, received the protection of the law. Judges decided long, long ago that the English common law does not allow slavery. Even as far back as Shakespeare the 'Moor of Venice', Othello, was portrayed as an intelligent man with power, not a object of contempt. (I'll admit his portrayal of Shylock was inimical; perhaps because the moneylenders of the time commonly charged interest rates of 66% per year and more. And traditionally money-lending had been an occupation specifically reserved for Jews, until the Italians started getting in on the act, at which point they became the despised group. It was not an occupation that endeared one to the hearts of the indebted. Thereafter the Jews got a much better press. Generally, what counted was what you did, not what you were, at least in the Protestant countries.) Any flaws he (Othello) possessed were those common to any individual of any background, not as inherent in his racial ancestry. There was no 'shock-horror' in portraying such a man 400 years ago. I fear there would be if the play were to be written now, with every activist and polemicist ranting about stereotyping and 'negative images'. And this is progress, an expression of enlightened attitudes? Not in my book. I see a parallel with the Elves. It seems JKR decided to add characters from old Scottish folklore - Brownies. Elves that colonise houses, do the chores for no payment, but vanish when offered gifts or clothes, never to return. (As an aside, they have long been celebrated as the junior branch of the Guides, the female version of the Scouts, helpful pixies who do good things but don't expect payment.) Even a superficial analysis of the text militates against Elvish slavery. They are too strongly magical, the majority seem happy in their role and the bee in Hermione's bonnet is not supported by *anyone* in the canon, not soft-hearted Hagrid, not compassionate Dumbledore. Doesn't that tell you something? Apparently not. "I can't wait, I've a conclusion to jump to" seems an all too common response. Yes, Dobby seems to have been badly treated by the Malfoys. So what? You expect baddies to be caring, loving employers? Get real. The plot demands baddies, and baddies act badly. Surprised? In contrast Winky is pathetic and Kreacher just plain nasty. A trio of very different characters formed, just as we were told by DD, by the attitudes of the families they are connected to. I don't get the impression that more should be read into it than that. Lately sexual stereotyping has been centre stage. Oh, dear. Am I mistaken or has freedom of choice been banned by some posters? Molly in particular has taken the brunt of the criticism. She is at fault because she is not this, that or the other. Mothers must not present a motherly image it seems, or at least only do so in the gaps in their busy, professional schedule. All women must conform to a certain fashionable profile or be damned. Rubbish. Of course, Petunia does not get the same amount of flak for the same behaviour because she is not intended to be a sympathetic character, so it's all right, in fact it's positively praiseworthy that she embodies a 'negative image'. Molly is a well drawn portrait of a common British phenomenon - the traditional mum. They can still be found in large numbers, but some posters fume at the thought of their very existence in this fictional realm, let alone the factual world. Perhaps they feel threatened by her; maybe they are not so secure in their choices after all. Methinks they doth protest too much. Some nagging doubts, are there? I suppose that it is a sort of back-handed compliment to JKR that so many words have been spouted in a critique of a fictional society. Those of you who have read my past posts will know that I love analysing, dreaming up conspiracies, seeing the worst sides of the characters. I'll pervert the plotlines with the best of them. It keeps me out of mischief and is essentially harmless. One thing I will not do is moan about JKR not complying with my personal ethics. I will compare the Potterverse ethical stances with my own, yes, but only to highlight a point, not to advertise my own smug political platform. Because, you see, I accept that there is a possibility that I may be mistaken in my beliefs, that modification may be required as circumstances change or new evidence comes to light, that differing societies develop different social strategies. But I fear there are some out there who consider themselves fully paid up members of moral monopolies that are the sole arbiters of what is right and correct and even when faced with a fantasy where good will triumph, it's still not good enough for them. I love an apt quotation, so here's one from Oliver Cromwell: "I beg of you, in the bowels of Christ, consider that you may be wrong." Kneasy From belijako at online.no Tue Nov 11 13:19:20 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:19:20 -0000 Subject: Do Wizards Always...? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84612 Sandrranch wrote: > Do wizards always make noise when they apparate and disapparate? Me: I don't think so. I remember the scene where Dumbledore arrives and departs in Privet Drive at the start of book 1, and there are no loud cracks at all... He is doing it silently as far as I remember. Maybe extra skilled wizards (and elves) may apparate/disapparate without a sound... Berit From erinellii at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 13:29:33 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:29:33 -0000 Subject: Sorting Hat song in SS/PS--does it mean anything? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84613 Siriusly Snapey Susan: > Good evening, all. I'm currently in a re-read of SS, and as I read > the sorting hat's song, something bugged me. > 7 syllables, 5 syllables, 8 syllables, 5 syllables. It just doesn't fit at all, and it is awkward to say. Has this been discussed before? Is this something intentional on JKR's part-- something designed to show us that Slytherin is slightly "off"? Or did she really have a hard time finding words to fit the general pattern and that fit in smoothly with the rest? > > I invite you to read all four stanzas together and see if you don't > notice what I'm saying. Smooth X 3...then the awkward Slytherin > stanza. I do notice it a bit... but when I sing the whole song to myself, I can make it sound ok. I think it makes it easier to remember that there isn't any music to go with it, this is just the Sorting Hat singing, so it can change up the rhythm a bit if it wants to. Erin From belijako at online.no Tue Nov 11 13:33:12 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:33:12 -0000 Subject: Phineas Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84614 I've looked up www.behindthename.com , and see that the name "Phineas" could mean "serpent's mouth" in Hebrew (or stem from old Egyptian meaning "Nubian", black?). There seems to be a lot of enlightened people on this list, so I wonder if anyone has more background information on the former Slytherin Headmaster's first name... Berit From sylviablundell at aol.com Tue Nov 11 13:43:20 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:43:20 -0000 Subject: Luna equals silver Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84615 NKittyhawk97 wrote: >Perhaps Peeves was the one who originated Luna's nickname, causing me to conclude that Peeves knows a secret... Now me: It's a beguiling thought, but I would think that the fact that JKR allowed Peeves to be cut out of the first film precludes him from being the possessor of any important secret. It's possible, of course, that he may appear in future films, but I think that is unlikely. Sylvia (who didn't really miss Peeves all that much) From sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 11 13:55:41 2003 From: sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk (sachmet96) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:55:41 -0000 Subject: Responsability for Sirius's Death In-Reply-To: <000f01c3a893$8091bf00$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84616 > > sachmet96: > > I don't see how this makes him not responsible for his own death. He > > knew not to leave the house but did it, the reason why he shouldn't > > leave it is unimportant imo. He left and dies, so it's his fault. If > > he hadn't died then his whereabouts would have been known and he > > would have endangered the people who where seen there with him > > Me (K) > > who was going to make his whereabouts known? Most of the DEs were escaed > prisoners, Voldemort was trying to pretend he didn't existy. That leaves > people like Lucius malfoy - who was in the building to try and kill Harry > Potter - how exactly were they going to report it to the Ministry? sachmet96: Fudge did come in the end. It was only lucky that the body of Sirius went through the veil, else there would have been trouble for the Order and Dumbledore, how were they to explain his presence? That's what I meant. K: > He didn't run off in an irresponsible manner, he went with a well organized > rescue party, organized btw by the very people you are saying didn't want > him to leave the house, if they hadn't decided that it was OK for him to > come he wouldn't have arrived with them he'd have arrived alone. sachmet96: I was of the impression they had to hurryI don't think they had the time to discuss with a probably stubborn and unreasonalbe Sirius (and make him see sense) so they had to take him with them, if they wanted to or not. K: The fact is > that Sirius is Harry's godfather, the one thing he can still do for his best > friend is look after Harry. In his mind (and to some extent in the minds of > others - Dumbledore accepts permission slips from him, Molly wouldn't argue > about Harry's welfare with him if she felt it wasn't his concern) he is > responsible for Harry. it would have been irresponsible to let others go off > and risk their lives to rescue him and sit at home himself doing nothing > when he was (afawk) as capable as any of the others there and in no more > danger than any of them. sachmet96: I disagree there. As his godfather it is his responsibility to care for Harry right, but that does mean to stay alive and not die on him or try to rescue him when there were other people to do it who were suited to do it. I think that was irresponsible of Sirius. K: > > Appart from that Snape contacted him to make sure he was at Grimmauld > > Place so Sirius would have known something was up and he shouldn't > > leave the house. > > > > But Snape checked if he was there to see if Harry was right about him being > a prisoner at the MoM not to check if he was being a good little boy. sachmet96: And told him to stay in the house to inform DD. UK OotP p. 732 "Professor Snape requested that Sirius remain behind, as he needed somebody to remain at Headquarters to tell me what had happened,..." K: > He had as much reason to be there as anyone else. Again he didn't run off > without informing anyone where he was going - the rest of the rescue party > knew he was there and if his staying behind had been as vital as you seem to > think then either they would have insisted he do it or assigned someone else > to do it. I would point out that you seem to think there were enough of them > without him there but they didn't defeat the bad guys easily by overwhelming > numbers, with one less person in the fight for the Order *more* people could > have died. sachmet96: Not if Sirius had stayed behind as instructed. DD was the important person in the fight and because of Sirius he was too late and so all others were unnecessarily endangered. I think we both just have to agree to disagree on this matter :-). From entropymail at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 13:59:26 2003 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 13:59:26 -0000 Subject: Lupin After All? was: Responsibility for Sirius's Death In-Reply-To: <20031111094232.86869.qmail@web25104.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84617 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, udder_pen_dragon wrote: > I read a lot about who is believed to be responsible for Sirisus dieing. Of course the blame is shared is shared, I have compiled a list of the usual suspects and some mabee not so usual. I have put them in what I believe to be ranking order. > Please let me know what you think > 1) Voldemort : Obviously > 2) Bellatrix Lestrange : she fired the shot > 3) Kretcher : If he had done his job and brought Sirius to talk to Harry, end of problem. > 4) Sevrus Snape : for IMO not even attempting to teach Harry Occlumency. If you want to teach a 15 year old, to play Tennis you don't hire Rudedski and Phillipousis (excuse the spelling for bot of those) to serve aces at him in the hope that he might learn something. > 5) Dumbledore : For the same reason he blames himself OOTP UK starting page728 Let's not forget 6)Lupin. I was never much of an Evil!Lupin supporter, but after going back and re-reading the battle scene in the MoM, I'm beginning to have my doubts. Every one of the Order members are accounted for during that scene. Each one's position is mentioned at one time or another *except* Lupin. He is not mentioned during the battle at all...he's not fighting off any DE's. We all assume that the second shot, which kills Sirius, comes from Bellatrix's wand. Harry certainly assumes this. But the passage doesn't actually say this. JKR even has Dumbledore conveniently looking the other way until Sirius has already been hit. Could Lupin have been standing behind Bellatrix and shot Sirius from that position? (If so, perhaps it was Lupin who talked Sirius into coming to the MoM). Or, perhaps Lupin was aiming at Bellatrix from behind, in order to defend his friend, but missed and hit Sirius accidentally? Lupin's shot would certainly account for Sirius's "surprised" look. I had originally believed that his surprise was of being hit, but it could certainly be of being dealt a fatal blow by his last remaining childhood friend. :: Entropy :: who would sure like to see a priori incantatem done on those two wands (Lupin's and Bellatrix's). From sylviablundell at aol.com Tue Nov 11 14:02:32 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:02:32 -0000 Subject: Lexicon contamination Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84618 I dont think Harry's wanting to be in Gryffindor has anything to do with what house his father was in. Harry was anxious to get into Gryffindor largely because that was the house Ron wanted to be in, as all his family were. Similarly, he was desperate not to be placed in Slytherin because of what Hagrid had told him, and the fact that Draco Malfoy (to whom he had taken an instant dislike) was anxious to get into Slytherin. At this stage, Harry knows very little about Hogwarts, or any of its arrangements, or indeed of the WW in general. The Sorting Hat's song may have influenced him a bit, but mostly I think it was a desire to be with Ron, the first real friend he had ever had. Sylvia (whose question to JKR would be "Who the hell is Florence?" From kcawte at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 11 22:14:00 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:14:00 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Stereotyping References: Message-ID: <000901c3a8a1$20d86740$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84619 Kneasy > > Elves seem to be a cause of regular angst with frequent fulminations > against the evils of slavery. > All well and good, but is it applicable? > > Slavery has never, ever been a significant part of English society; at > least not since the Romans left. > Delve into history and literature and it's quite difficult to find > more than a few scattered examples of slavery within the UK. Slavery > is not part of our tradition. Why then assume that JKR would add such a > perversion to an essentially English story? > Me (K) If it looks like a rat, sounds like a rat and smells like a rat ..... People assume that elves are slaves because they are owned by wizarding families, work for no pay and are unable to leave without the permission of their owner. Unless you have a definition of slavery different to the one most people use that pretty much sounds like slavery to me. Kneasy And traditionally > money-lending had been an occupation specifically reserved for Jews, > until the Italians started getting in on the act, at which point they > became the despised group. It was not an occupation that endeared one > to the hearts of the indebted. Thereafter the Jews got a much better > press. K Money-lending was their profession because they were banned from most other professions. After this so-called better press they were still seen as scapegoats by society, banned from paracticing their religion outside of their own homes, massacred on several occasions and then expelled from the country. Kneasy > > I see a parallel with the Elves. It seems JKR decided to add > characters from old Scottish folklore - Brownies. Elves that colonise > houses, do the chores for no payment, but vanish when offered gifts or > clothes, never to return. K But they are free to come and go as they will, they choose to work for the families they help and can stop at any time they please. In fact they generally only assist those people who have performed kind deeds towards other humans pr faeries. While House Elves are no doubt based on Brownies (see my previous post about JKR and mythology) they have evolved far beyond the traditional mythology and are slaves. While I have no sympathy with SPEW as Hermione seems insistent on forcing her views of how they should live on them with no regard for their opinions, making her no better than the Malfoys imo, the Elves are slaves, albeit willing slaves in many cases. Kneasy Even a superficial analysis of the text militates against > Elvish slavery. They are too strongly magical, the majority seem happy > in their role and the bee in Hermione's bonnet is not > supported by *anyone* in the canon, not soft-hearted Hagrid, not > compassionate Dumbledore. Doesn't that tell you something? Apparently > not. "I can't wait, I've a conclusion to jump to" seems an all too > common response. > K I agree that most of them are happy to be in the position they are in but that doesn't stop it being slavery. As a race House Elves seem to have no rights whatsoever, are owned by others and are not free to leave their positions if they feel mistreated. This is clearly slavery. This is a much more complex ethical and moral situation than just presenting it as slavery and congrats to JKR for introducing another issue that makes us think. Slavery is wrong (I don't think anyone here would argue with that) but is it worse to force your views on those 'victims' and force them to be free when they don't want to be? Kneasy > Yes, Dobby seems to have been badly treated by the Malfoys. So what? > You expect baddies to be caring, loving employers? Get real. The plot > demands baddies, and baddies act badly. Surprised? In contrast Winky is > pathetic and Kreacher just plain nasty. A trio of very different > characters formed, just as we were told by DD, by the attitudes of the > families they are connected to. I don't get the impression that more > should be read into it than that. > K If Malfoy was nothing more than an employer then Dobby could leave without Harry having to trick Lucius into giving Dobby clothes. He is an owner. And I don't understand your point about them having different characters - this doesn't stop them being slaves and I don't recall anyone terying to claim that all elves are the same. Kneasy > Lately sexual stereotyping has been centre stage. Oh, dear. Am I > mistaken or has freedom of choice been banned by some posters? Molly > in particular has taken the brunt of the criticism. She is at fault > because she is not this, that or the other. Mothers must not present > a motherly image it seems, or at least only do so in the gaps in their > busy, professional schedule. All women must conform to a certain > fashionable profile or be damned. K I think the problem is not that Molly is a stay at home mother with all the domestic and motherly attributes of a domestic goddess but rather that (at least until OoP) there were very very few strong female characters of any kind. In the wizarding world the impression was that as a woman you could be a teacher, a nurse or a mother. Hermione was the only schoolgirl we saw who didn't fit into a stereotypical giggling girly mould. In OoP Ginny was developed into a storng character, I'm reserving judgement on Luna and McGonagall became much more than just a teacher. Umbridge and Bellatrix gave us some female bad guys and a past female Minister for Magic was mentioned. I'm all for women following nurtut#ring professions or being stay at home mums if they want but that was the *only* image that we were getting and that was wrong, especially I feel in a childrens book. I don't think JKR did it deliberately I think it just happened but the book needed some strong female role-models. Kneasy Rubbish. Of course, Petunia does not > get the same amount of flak for the same behaviour because she is > not intended to be a sympathetic character, so it's all right, K Actually she doesn't get as much flak because she is still a minor character (little bit of development leading to unanswered questions in OoP) wo we really don't know much about. Molly was much more central to the books as she and her family take up much more space. Kneasy One thing I will not > do is moan about JKR not complying with my personal ethics. I will > compare the Potterverse ethical stances with my own, yes, but only to > highlight a point, not to advertise my own smug political platform. > K I don't think we can really comment on JKR's beliefs because none of us know her. I don't think she personally believes that slavery is good or that all women should be carers and nothing more, but that doesn't change the fact that slavery exists in the books (despite what you seem to want to argue) and that the WW was fairly sexist. K From kcawte at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 11 22:19:34 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:19:34 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Responsability for Sirius's Death References: Message-ID: <002b01c3a8a1$f6729010$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84620 > > Me (K) > > > > who was going to make his whereabouts known? Most of the DEs were > escaed > > prisoners, Voldemort was trying to pretend he didn't existy. That > leaves > > people like Lucius malfoy - who was in the building to try and kill > Harry > > Potter - how exactly were they going to report it to the Ministry? > > sachmet96: > Fudge did come in the end. It was only lucky that the body of Sirius > went through the veil, else there would have been trouble for the > Order and Dumbledore, how were they to explain his presence? > That's what I meant. > K If he was dead someone else would have had to disguise him in some way, or hope he got overlooked. If he'd been alive he could have transformed into Padfoot > sachmet96: > I was of the impression they had to hurryI don't think they had the > time to discuss with a probably stubborn and unreasonalbe Sirius (and > make him see sense) so they had to take him with them, if they wanted > to or not. > K But if it was as vital as you seem to be saying then surely they would have said "Oh for goodness sake we'll have to take him Tonks stay here and tell DD" or someting similar not "Oh we'll have to take him, never mind I'm sure DD'll work out where we are eventually" > > sachmet96: > I disagree there. As his godfather it is his responsibility to care > for Harry right, but that does mean to stay alive and not die on him > or try to rescue him when there were other people to do it who were > suited to do it. I think that was irresponsible of Sirius. > K I don't understand why you think he was less suited to make the rescue than the others. That was my point that he was as capable as the others and in no more danger than them so why should he let them go off into danger and stay at home himself. > sachmet96: > Not if Sirius had stayed behind as instructed. DD was the important > person in the fight and because of Sirius he was too late and so all > others were unnecessarily endangered. > K I don't think DD was delayed all that much or like I say someone would have left him a message when Sirius decided not to stay at home sachmet96 > I think we both just have to agree to disagree on this matter :-). > > K Yeah I don't think either of us is going to persuade the other of their opinion :) K From tminton at deckerjones.com Tue Nov 11 14:24:27 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 08:24:27 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Slytherin Sirius?, was: Of course Snape is a Slytherin Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE46261C@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84621 Tonya: > > > Knowing now that Snape is a good guy playing double agent. What > > house > > > do you think he was in?? Cheekyweebisom: > > Slytherin, obviously. I'll say it AGAIN: Slytherin =/= evil. Tonya: > I wasn't trying to be smart.... I have been enjoying all > the "House" > discussions. I really thought that Black was a Slytherin and now > after > all these wonderful posts I am not sure. I was also sure that > Snape was > a Slytherin. Although I have not found canon to back that up!! > I think that good wizards can and do come from Slytherin. Me (Cheekyweebisom): Oh, sure. I'm sorry if I seemed brusque; the "Slytherins are ESE!" statements really get to me, though. It just seems SO simplistic. I'm interested in why so many people think/thought Sirius was a Slytherin. I don't get it at all: he's not particularly cunning or ambitious, though he IS very, very brave (and is described as such by DD himself), he was best friends with James, and his mother hates him. These all seem to point to Gryffindor, don't they? What points to Slytherin? I'm very curious. Cheekyweebisom Now Tonya: I think that Sirius's family points to Slytherin BUT I really believe that people change and I think that JKR thinks so also. My belief is that maybe in first year MAYBE Sirius was put in Slytherin and I think that as he grew up he decided that was not the life that he wanted. Same with Snape, obviously we see that we are missing something critical, but at some point he decided that dark arts and hurting people was not for him. I really believe that people can grow and change. I look at my own life and I am not the same person that I was when I was 11 or 12. I grew up in a wealthy family who has all these ideals that in my opinion NOW are crap. Therefore, I don't get along with my family, and it took me a while to figure out that I was allowed to have my own opinion and do my own thing. Change comes from growth. Just my opinion, I believe in people and that they have the power to grow and change!! I think that both Sirius and Snape are good regardless of where they started out!! :) Tonya (Stepping down from the microphone) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 11 14:59:06 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:59:06 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Chapter Five Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84622 Chapter 5 Summary Harry learns that no 12 is Sirius's ancestral house, and that Sirius has offered it to Dumbledore for headquarters. Sirius's voice is hard and bitter as he complains that this is the only useful thing he's been able to do. The narrator notes that Harry expected a better welcome. Sirius leads Harry downstairs. The kitchen is in the basement, a cavernous room with rough stone walls. Pipe smoke hangs in the air "like battle fumes." In the center of the room is a long wooden table. Mr. Weasley, his son Bill and a heap of rags, which turns out to be Mundungus Fletcher, are seated together. Mrs. Weasley is irritable, scolding everyone but Harry as she tries to clear up the detritus of the meeting, and get dinner on the table. Sirius reveals that he's been confined to the house for a month. With both the Ministry and Voldemort after him, Dumbledore feels there's not much Sirius can do for the Order. There's comic relief with a touch of foreboding as the twins try to set the table by magic and send a knife plunging into the table "point down and quivering ominously, exactly where Sirius's right hand had been a moment before." This episode launches Molly into a paragraph of capital letters as she screams at her boys. But Harry and Sirius laugh as Mundungus, swearing, picks himself off the floor. Mr. Weasley reminds the twins that they're supposed to show responsibility now they're of age. Mrs. Weasley continues her rant, but stops short when she comes to Percy. She glances in fear at her husband. Arthur looks wooden. Bill and Lupin step in to calm things down. They all sit down to dinner, and after a few minutes of silence several conversations ensue. Molly approaches Sirius about a suspected boggart in the drawing room and an infestation of doxies. Sirius is indifferent and then, Harry thinks, sarcastic. Tonks entertains Hermione and Ginny with her metamorphmagus ability. Mr. Weasley, Lupin and Bill have an intense conversation about goblins. We learn that that even though Voldemort murdered goblins in the last war, there's a chance they'll go over to him. "I think it depends what they're offered," says Lupin. "And I'm not talking about gold; if they're offered freedoms we've been denying them for centuries, they're going to be tempted." Bill agrees that anti-wizard feelings are strong. The goblins are especially incensed that the Ministry has done little to apprehend Ludo Bagman or help the goblins recover the gold he owes to them. Fred, George, Ron and Mundungus roar with laughter as Mundungus relates a shady story about how he sold some stolen toads back to their original owner. "I don't know where you learned about right and wrong, Mundungus" says Molly, " but you seem to have missed a few crucial lessons." Harry eats so much that Dudley's jeans are tight on him. Everybody's quiet and relaxed, when Sirius remarks that he's surprised Harry hasn't asked about Voldemort. A shiver goes around the room. Lupin is suddenly wary, lowering his goblet slowly. . (Alert readers have noted that despite being a werewolf, Lupin is apparently unaffected by silver when in human form.) Harry indignantly protests that he asked Ron and Hermione at once, but was told that they weren't allowed in the Order Molly is now bolt upright, every trace of drowsiness gone. She says that Harry is too young to be told. Sirius begins insisting that Harry has a right to know what's been happening, but he's interrupted by Fred and George, who protest that Sirius hasn't told them one stinking thing. This precipitates a quarrel between Mrs. Weasley and Sirius. Mrs. Weasley tells us that Dumbledore's orders are that Harry be told only what he needs to know, and states that this is different than allowing Harry to ask whatever he likes. Mrs. Weasley thinks that Sirius wants to involve Harry against Dumbledore's orders because Harry reminds him of James. Sirius denies this, but Mrs. Weasley disagrees with him. Sirius, feeling that he's being accused of being irresponsible, begins to get angry. Molly retaliates with the scathing remark that Sirius wasn't exactly available while he was in Azkaban. Molly turns to Arthur and then to Lupin hoping they'll back her up, but both feel that the situation has changed and Harry needs to be told the facts. There's more uproar as Molly and Sirius spar over who has responsibility for Harry, but finally Molly gives in and withdraws with Ginny, who is utterly furious at being the only child not allowed to stay in the room. Finally Harry asks the questions that have been tormenting him for a month. Where's Voldemort? What's he doing? Sirius and Lupin explain that Voldemort's plans were upset when Harry escaped and informed Dumbledore of Voldemort's return. Lupin says that the Order knows more than Voldemort thinks they do. As many readers have long suspected, this is indeed a war of spies. But the Ministry is still refusing to believe to believe that Voldemort is back. Fudge's suspicion and jealousy of Dumbledore have grown to the point where he has ordered the Ministry and the Daily Prophet to discredit him. Dumbledore has lost his position on the Wizengamot and his seat in the International Confederaton of wizards, but says he isn't worried as long as he's still on the Chocolate Frog cards. The difficulties the Order has in recruiting people to help are detailed. We learn that Kingsley Shacklebolt is in charge of the hunt for Sirius and has been misdirecting it. Lupin and Sirius explain that Voldemort has been trying to recruit followers in secret, using trickery, blackmail and jinxes. And then Sirius mentions that Voldemort is after something else. Harry immediately asks what it is. Lupin and Sirius exchange "the most fleeting of looks" before Sirius answers, speaking vaguely of something Voldemort didn't have before, like a weapon. Harry is trying to find out what kind of weapon when Mrs. Weasley returns. She is trembling and furious as she orders her younger children to bed. Harry says he wants to join the Order and fight. It is not Mrs. Weasley who silences him, but Lupin. "There are dangers involved of which you can have no idea, any of you...I think Molly's right, Sirius. We've said enough." Sirius does not argue and the chapter closes as Harry, recognizing defeat, follows the rest of the younger set up the stairs. QUESTIONS: 1. Why isn't Sirius happier to see Harry? 2. In chapter four, Molly seemed a bit anxious, but she was thrilled to see Harry and nowhere near as irritable as she is when we meet her again a few hours later in chapter five. Is her change in mood due to something that happened at the meeting? Did the Order just find out that Voldemort is after something in the Department of Mysteries? Have they been told that it concerns Harry? 3. We've been given to understand that the shrewd and cunning goblins are nobody's fools, not easily subjected to jinxes, tricks or blackmail. Yet Lupin thinks they will be tempted to join Voldemort even though they know he has murdered their kind. Why? 4. Is Molly's attempt to involve Sirius in the housecleaning a good idea, or would she have been wiser to leave him alone? 5. Harry seems equally interested in the lighthearted efforts of Tonks and Mundungus to entertain the other youngsters, and in the more intense, grownup conversations going on. But he doesn't take part in any of the talk until Sirius asks him. Why? 6. Where does Molly expect people to learn about right and wrong? 7. Earlier, Aunt Petunia revealed an unexpected knowledge of the wizarding world. Now, Molly has an Aunt Petunia moment and refuses to let Harry ask questions. What is the significance of this switch? Why does Molly feel it would be dangerous to let Harry ask questions? Is there a difference between telling Harry what he needs to know and letting him ask whatever he likes, or is this a distinction without a difference and an indication of Molly's illogical state of mind? 8. Molly and Sirius act like stereotypical parents in this chapter: Molly the overprotective, interfering Mum and Sirius the feckless single Dad. Is this consistent with their portrayal in the rest of the series? Are these caricatures harmless entertainment or do they foster sexism? 9. What is the significance of the "fleeting glance" that Sirius and Lupin exchange? Are they privy to information the others do not have about the Prophecy and if so, how do they know it? When Lupin says that the Order knows more than Voldemort thinks it does, is this true only because Voldemort's spy hasn't made a report on tonight's meeting yet ? 10. Why does Lupin bring the conversation to a close before Harry can ask the question he'll immediately put to Ron and Hermione in the next chapter: where is the weapon being kept? What are the dangers Lupin says the others have no idea of? What does it say about Lupin and Sirius's relationship that Sirius, who argues with everyone else, even Dumbledore, accepts Lupin's decision at once and without question? Pippin From lunatique0619 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 14:55:41 2003 From: lunatique0619 at yahoo.com (Jee H. Lee) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 06:55:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Black Sisters / alternate look at pureblood mania Message-ID: <20031111145541.43169.qmail@web13107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84623 You know, I just reread the "Noble and Most Ancient House of Black" chapter, and I noticed for the first time that the sisters' names are written down in order of Bellatrix, Andromeda, and Narcissa. I totally missed it before. :P *Puts on Crabbe cap and sits in the corner* Mandy: > I get the sense that all the > *evil* or *bad* characters are handsome and attractive. Where as the > *good* guys (and girls) are all plain looking and social misfits. Interesting. I get that feeling, too. For instance, ever since I read about the Black sisters I imagine Andromeda as rather plain, in sharp contrast to her vivid and beautiful sisters. I imagine she was the ugly duckling(I won't say black sheep :) of the family even before she married Ted Tonks. Onto another track... JJPandy: > How did other muggle-born wizards learn where to buy their > school supplies and how to get onto Platform 9 and 3/4 once they > received their Hogwarts' letters? and eiffelangel: > If Slytherin took only pure-blooded wizards and Riddle was a > half-blood, then why would he have been in Slytherin? and Nemi: >I had a thought that perhaps the definition of >"pureblood" has changed over the ages. These three comments got me thinking about what being "pure-blooded" really means. Maybe its meaning, or at least its ideological origins, wasn't about blood per se. Consider: The inclusion of Muggle-born wizards into Hogwarts necessarily brings Muggles into the wizarding world as well. Think of the Grangers, the Creeveys, the Finch-Fletchleys, the Thomases, the Abbots--these are all Muggles who came to be aware of the WW through their children. What if Salazar Slytherin, at least originally, was objecting not to Muggle-borns themselves, but to their Muggle families becoming a part of the WW? This was way before the Statute of Wizarding Secrecy, yet it's easy to imagine there was a lot of bad blood(okay, bad choice of words) between wizards and Muggles. Maybe, then, Slytherin was concerned with the sociological, rather than genetic, impact of Muggle-borns and Muggles. Afterward it degenerated into eugenics. Not trying to defend Salazar Slytherin, and it's still racism any way you put it, but this version of events does make him a little more understandable. Perhaps, then, the Sorting Hat takes into account not 100% purity of wizarding blood, but the impact that a particular student is going to have on the wizarding world, namely how much he or she will bring Muggles into the picture. With Tom Riddle, the Hat might have judged the effect to be minimal. Here's a far-fetched flight of fancy(ooh, alliteration). I can imagine Slytherin or one of his ideological successors trying to make a Muggle-borns' entering Hogwarts dependant on their cutting ties with their Muggle families. One can imagine how well *that* went over.. -Lunatique __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 11 15:19:10 2003 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:19:10 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Stereotyping Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84624 B Arrowsmith said: >Stereotyping. > >By the posters. > >This post may not see the light of day - it all depends if I can keep >it within the bounds of civility demanded by the Admin Elves; certainly >I expect a lot of fans to disagree with it, that's not a problem. But I > would be worried if no-one agreed with me. Well, don't worry. I've been thinking for at least a week about writing a similar post. The "let's all hang Molly from the lamppost because she's not a CEO" thread was especially starting to get up my nose. The thing is, the Harry Potter series is a deservedly well-loved and popular work, and lots of people -- it seems to me -- would like to see JKR use that popularity to push some agenda or other which they think is important. Now, since JKR is the writer, if *she* wants to push an agenda in her own books, it's her right. If she chooses either to put forward an agenda which differs from the reader's, or (as she has done in my opinion) to ignore politics altogether except insofar as it is used to tell a good story, that is also her right. I, personally, think she's done an excellent job of keeping to the point and not allowing irrelevant or distracting issues to affect her. Religions of all kinds have tried to claim the books as their own, but in fact she has simply avoided the entire issue -- which I appreciate. The issue of "slavery" and house-elves, I think, was especially well dealt with -- on the one hand, it's clearly shown as a bad thing and a source of abuse, but on the other hand we have JKR making fun of people like Hermione and SPEW, idealists who go off the deep end without doing any research or asking the people whose lives they are attempting to legislate what *they* think. The theory that because Molly does not have a salaried job she is not a "strong character" reminds me of something that was pointed out in the early and strident days of feminism -- that the people who denigrate women who keep houses and raise children are insulting their own mothers and grandmothers. And there were (and still are) a whole lot of strong characters, sharp intellects, and accomplished individuals among them. Where do you think the Weasley children inherited all those brains (several Head Boys) and picked up the ethics that they display? At least half of these qualities had to come from Molly. Furthermore, as some perceptive soul has pointed out, if it weren't for Molly, the Weasleys and the OoP would all starve to death ... And can someone please explain to me why some people think there should be more on-screen sex in these books? Bad writers put sex into a book to help it sell; JKR isn't a bad writer and her books are selling just fine. :) You can get that stuff anywhere, but you can only get Harry Potter in a Harry Potter book. In short, I think that trying to use these books as support for, or as a springboard for, one's own political or social views is inappropriate. Taken far enough, it may even interfere with enjoyment. (My husband is anti-boarding school and that's the first thing he focussed on in the books, and he still can't get past that. And let's not even discuss his reaction to the house-elves.) Hoping also that I have remained within the bounds of civility, Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Concerned that messages may bounce because your Hotmail account is over limit? Get Hotmail Extra Storage! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es From meriaugust at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 16:07:10 2003 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 16:07:10 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Chapter Five In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84625 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: Pippin asks: > QUESTIONS: > > 1. Why isn't Sirius happier to see Harry? Meri: I am sure that he is happy to see Harry, but imagine being stuck in Grimmauld Place for a month with little company and feeling useless: I'm sure it's pretty hard for Sirius to conjure up a good mood in this case, especially as there is a war on and he can't really participate in it. > 2. In chapter four, Molly seemed a bit anxious, but she was > thrilled to see Harry and nowhere near as irritable as she is > when we meet her again a few hours later in chapter five. Is her > change in mood due to something that happened at the > meeting? Did the Order just find out that Voldemort is after > something in the Department of Mysteries? Have they been told > that it concerns Harry? Meri: I think that her irritableness has to do with the fact that up until this point in the series Harry has always allowed Molly to baby him (like when he visits the Burrow in CoS and GoF) and now he's trying to, maybe, assert his adulthood. He's not the helpless little boy who needs her to darn his socks and give him fourth helpings of breakfast anymore. Molly also seems to have a short fuse when it comes to her kids sassing her, like in the scene in GoF where she buys Ron his dress robes and he says he won't wear them. Molly gets positively snippy and irritated with him. > 3. We've been given to understand that the shrewd and cunning > goblins are nobody's fools, not easily subjected to jinxes, tricks > or blackmail. Yet Lupin thinks they will be tempted to join > Voldemort even though they know he has murdered their kind. > Why? Meri: I am pretty sure (my copy of OotP is still out on loan) that it was Bill who said that if the goblins can be convinced that LV and the DEs are willing to offer them freedoms that the MoM has been denying them for years that this may prove an enticing (and understandably so) offer. The goblins seem to have a tendency to revolt against the MoM, as we have seen in all the goblin rebellions that Professor Binns bores the students with. > 4. Is Molly's attempt to involve Sirius in the housecleaning a good > idea, or would she have been wiser to leave him alone? Meri: Probably she should have left him be, but as it is his house, maybe she felt uncomfortable poking around without his involvement. What I was surprised about was why Sirius didn't take this opportunity to use the housecleaning as a sort of exorcism to get out the bad vibes. Maybe then he would have been slightly happier (or more comfortable anyway) staying confined there. > 5. Harry seems equally interested in the lighthearted efforts of > Tonks and Mundungus to entertain the other youngsters, and in > the more intense, grownup conversations going on. But he > doesn't take part in any of the talk until Sirius asks him. Why? Meri: IMHO, I think this has to do with all that Harry has been through in the last few days, from the dementor attack, to being expelled to the ministry hearings to the rescue from Privet Drive. He's probably just glad to be among people who don't treat him like dirt and value his company, and he's probably more that glad just to listen and eat his fill. This may also show his moving to adulthood: he doesn't know quite where he belongs anymore, the kids table or the adult table. > 6. Where does Molly expect people to learn about right and > wrong? Meri: Certainly from their parents, though I am pretty sure that this is just a sarcastic remark showing her distaste for the involvement of such crooks as Mungdungus in the Order. This may also be an indication that she is more upset with Percy's rebellion than she seems, and is maybe questioning her own parenting skills, which could also account for her overprotectiveness of Harry. > 7. Earlier, Aunt Petunia revealed an unexpected knowledge of the > wizarding world. Now, Molly has an Aunt Petunia moment and > refuses to let Harry ask questions. What is the significance of > this switch? Why does Molly feel it would be dangerous to let > Harry ask questions? Is there a difference between telling Harry > what he needs to know and letting him ask whatever he likes, or > is this a distinction without a difference and an indication of > Molly's illogical state of mind? Meri: This isn't out of character for Molly. In PoA, when Arthur wants to tell Harry about Sirius's escape from Azkaban, Molly doesn't like the idea at all (I'd quote cannon here, but this book is also out on loan). She wants very much to protect Harry, and seems to believe the old adage "ignorance in bliss". For Mollly, keeping Harry out of the loop is a device to keep him safe and keep him from doing anything irrational and dangerous (after all, the first thing he wants to do is join up). This is very different from Aunt Petunia, who merey wants to keep Harry from knowing anything about a past that she considers shameful. And as to why Petunia made any mention of knowledge about the dementors, I wholeheartedly that there are things about her that even we can't imagine. > 8. Molly and Sirius act like stereotypical parents in this chapter: > Molly the overprotective, interfering Mum and Sirius the feckless > single Dad. Is this consistent with their portrayal in the rest of > the series? Are these caricatures harmless entertainment or do > they foster sexism? Meri: I think Molly's is very consitent with how she has been portrayed in the previous books, but I don't think that she is being overprotective and interfereing with out good reason. There is a war going on after all, one of her sons has gone and joined up with a group dedicated to put the Order down, and now she has Harry, the prophecy and the Ministry hearings to deal with. Do I think that it is sexist to show her as a caring, though sometimes overbearing individual? Not IMHO. In Sirius' case, however, we have very little cannon backing up how he and Harry would interact on a father-son level. In GoF, the only other book where they have significant contact, that contact is limited to a few fire chats, a cave visit, and Dumbledore's office after the tragic events, so we don't really know how he would behave if the two were allowed to have a normal relationship. As to him being irresponsible when it comes to Harry, I just think that it is due to lack of experience raising a teenager. Sexism? I'm not really sure. But Sirius and Molly do provide a good look at one of the major themes of the book: one wants to baby him and the other treat him more of a grownup. Where does he fit? > 9. What is the significance of the "fleeting glance" that Sirius and > Lupin exchange? Are they privy to information the others do not > have about the Prophecy and if so, how do they know it? When > Lupin says that the Order knows more than Voldemort thinks it > does, is this true only because Voldemort's spy hasn't made a > report on tonight's meeting yet ? Meri: Are we sure that LV has a spy in the Order? I'm not sure about that, but I am pretty sure that almost everyone knows about the prophecy now, with the exception of the kids, Harry included. The adults may have been under orders from DD not to tell Harry anything about the prophecy, as he doesn't even learn what it was til the end of the book anyway. The glance was probably saying, "time to keep our mouths shut." > 10. Why does Lupin bring the conversation to a close before > Harry can ask the question he'll immediately put to Ron and > Hermione in the next chapter: where is the weapon being kept? > What are the dangers Lupin says the others have no idea of? > What does it say about Lupin and Sirius's relationship that > Sirius, who argues with everyone else, even Dumbledore, > accepts Lupin's decision at once and without question? Meri: Lupin is the only person from his childhood left that Sirius can truly call a trusted friend. As Lupin says later, he was made a prefect to help control his friends, so maybe he still has some sway over Sirius. As to why he ended the conversation, he may not be allowed to tell Harry about the Depatment of Mysteries or the prophecy, and telling Harry "no you can't know that" would surely raise more questions then it answered. Sorry I rambled so much, thought that these were great questions and just had to put my two cents in. Meri From cubs9911 at aol.com Tue Nov 11 15:16:12 2003 From: cubs9911 at aol.com (cubs99111) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:16:12 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84626 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermowninny719" wrote: > > > Hermowninny: > > > I don't think JKR ever said James was in Gryffindor in an > > interview. > > > The closest thing I can find is when she was asked "Whiat > position > > > did James play on the Gryffindor Quidditch team?" She > > > responded, "James was a chaser." Joe: I seem to remember that in OOP Harry was thinking about Ron and it said that "The truth was that Ron had just reminded Harry forcibly of another Gryffindor Quidditch player who had once sat rumpling his hair under this very tree". Of course, the other Gryffindor Quidditch player that Ron is reminding harry of was James. Harry saw James rumpling his hair under the tree in Snape's pensive. I think that this is pretty solid evidence that James was in Gryffindor or else JKR would have just wrote that Ron reminded Harry of another Quidditch player, not necessarily another Gryffindor Quidditch player. Thanks-Joe From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 16:02:02 2003 From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 16:02:02 -0000 Subject: Do Wizards Always...? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84627 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > Sandrranch wrote: > > > Do wizards always make noise when they apparate and disapparate? > > Me: > > I don't think so. I remember the scene where Dumbledore arrives and > departs in Privet Drive at the start of book 1, and there are no loud > cracks at all... He is doing it silently as far as I remember. Maybe > extra skilled wizards (and elves) may apparate/disapparate without a > sound... > > Berit psychobirdgirl(me): So that implies then that Hagrid is extra skilled at apparation, even though it is illegal for him to perform magic and he was never very good at it anyway. This leads me to the conclusion that Dumbledore made him disappear; further conclusion, Dumbledore has a way of watching people from afar and using his magic on them. psychobirdgirl From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 16:54:13 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 16:54:13 -0000 Subject: Harry's role (Was:Re: crowns and the Alchymical Wedding) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84628 > Hans: > > > > A few > > months ago there was a big debate in this group about whether Harry > Potter > > is everyman or Christ. I say he is both! > > > > Geoff: > I feel that I can only disagree with your view on Harry Potter. He > cannot be an everyman or Christ. No person can be a Christ figure > except Christ himself, God in human form. We can be Christ-like; we > are enjoined to imitate Christ ? read Philippians 2 for example. I can't actually be quite sure what either of you mean here unless you define your terms more exactly. For instance, one could debate whether C.S. Lewis' Aslan is Christ or a Christ figure (Geoff apparently seeing these as the same thing?), or whether Harry is an allegorical figure of Christ or just a normal person like any of us (aside from being fictional) deposited into special circumstances. I had always looked at Harry as a normal person, and at his story as what one might do given that magic is real (and given that an Evil Overlord has marked one for death). But the prophecy seems to change his role completely. If it is to be believed, Harry is the *one* who can save many people (not all mankind) from terror and death (not eternal misery). He is not Christ, but no longer quite everyman, either -- or at least that's the feeling I got by the end of the book. There is now a disconnect between him and the rest of us. Not only that, but there is the implication that he must do his saving by killing, which idea he likes no better than being killed, and which is nothing like what Christ had to do. Where does that leave Harry? His heart and mind are everyman's, but there is something that neither he nor we understand yet that sets him apart. He is no longer even everywizard. I can't imagine what JKR has in mind, though I know some of you have some very definite theories. Though there's always the idea that Harry and Dumbledore might be quite mistaken, if Firenze's warnings about interpreting prophecy apply. Annemehr belaboring the obvious, perhaps, but antsy for the answers From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Tue Nov 11 16:37:41 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:37:41 -0600 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor References: Message-ID: <00a001c3a873$13ab3a80$43069e40@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84629 > I don't think JKR ever said James was in Gryffindor in an > interview. > The closest thing I can find is when she was asked "Whiat > position > did James play on the Gryffindor Quidditch team?" She > responded, "James was a chaser." Iggy here: Could this be a misquote of her...or a flint in her comments? If he was a chaser, then why did the plaque in the movie say he was a seeker? And why was he shown in OotP playing with the snitch the way he was? And, while I don't have the books at hand right now, wasn't he mentioned in the books as a seeker a couple of times? Iggy McSnurd From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 17:20:41 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:20:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Portrait-Person Message-ID: <20031111172041.43668.qmail@web40001.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84630 11Nov03 -Corinth wrote: ..., we've seen that printed matter IS capable of functioning on its own in the Wizarding World (Riddle's diary, the Marauder's Map). When it comes to papers and pictures gaining conciousness, I don't think we should underestimate the possibilities. Paula now: Yes, now that you mention it, this fact has always puzzled me in WW publications. Remember the old picture that Harry was looking at Grimmauld Place, if I'm not mistaken? In the picture were Neville's parents his own, among other people. Can't site chapter and verse from OP, but I remember a statement to the effect that the people in the picture were waving and happy, not knowing what was to become of them. In other words, the people in the picture seemed to have no consciousness or awareness that they'd either been killed or had already had some other tragedy befall them ie, these portraits don't seem to know that they are already dead or seriously incapacitated. On the other hand, only people in actual painted portraits are sent on missions and actually speak out from their portraits, for example, Phenius' portrait at Grimmauld Place and DD's office. Humm..., just occured to me that printed matter in WW functions actively in different ways. Point in case, why do the portraits speak and move from picture to picture (not to mention the deeds of Riddle from his diary) and photos from The Daily Prophet (as far as I can recall) only wave and change facial expressions. Any ideas? ~Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From journalisto at hotmail.com Tue Nov 11 17:28:30 2003 From: journalisto at hotmail.com (Dan Youngren) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 09:28:30 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84631 Iggy: >If he was a chaser, then why did the plaque in the movie say he was a >seeker? Me (Dan): As a film producer, the reasoning is fairly simple: James being portrayed as a Seeker in the movie strengthens the connection between Harry and his father, allowing for more drama and pity for TBWL. Iggy: >And why was he shown in OotP playing with the snitch the way he was? Me (Dan): I assume this was meant to demonstrate his Ever So Remarkable Reflexes. Anyone can toss a big ball in the air and catch it, though, of course, in flight, catching and aiming throws of the Quaffle is much, much more difficult and greatly exciting... It's a lot more romantic and impressive to see a guy releasing and catching an object renowned for its speed and unpredictability, the focus of many Quidditch matches. Iggy: >And, while I don't have the books at hand right now, wasn't he mentioned in >the books as a seeker a couple of times? Me (Dan): Not as far as I know--the only canon we have about James' Qudditch history is that he was on the Gryffindor team as a Chaser, and this is from an interview, not the books. If you can find an in-book reference to his position, I owe you a coke. -Dan _________________________________________________________________ Send a QuickGreet with MSN Messenger http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/cdp_games From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 01:31:18 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:31:18 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor References: <00a001c3a873$13ab3a80$43069e40@rick> Message-ID: <001a01c3a8bc$b2764800$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84632 > > Iggy here: > > Could this be a misquote of her...or a flint in her comments? > > If he was a chaser, then why did the plaque in the movie say he was a > seeker? > K - Because some idiot writer thought it'd be all cool and touching if Harry got to see that he was following in his father's footsteps. Iggy > And why was he shown in OotP playing with the snitch the way he was? > K Doesn't stop him being a chaser, they need quick reactions too and it's not like he could carry a quaffle around with him. Besides it's more impressive to play with a snitch and he was a show-off Iggy > And, while I don't have the books at hand right now, wasn't he mentioned in > the books as a seeker a couple of times? > > K It never mentions his position at all. It's not a flint on JKR's part, if she says one thing and the movie says another then she's right and the movie's wrong. K From mail at chartfield.net Tue Nov 11 17:57:28 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:57:28 -0000 Subject: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84633 > Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: I'm wondering if others might weigh in w/ their opinions about the Malfoys, too. Because I'm thinking perhaps it's more of the Dreaded Movie Contamination which puts Draco, at least, into this category of handsome guys. Now Astrofiammante: I believe the Malfoys are supposed to possess the full set of 'natural advantages' - wealth, influence, material comfort etcetera. So you would probably guess that they'd be blessed with reasonable good looks too. Mandy wrote: > JKR, in her last interview at the Royal Albert Hall, said we are all getting far to fond of Draco, and I'm convinced it's because of the movies, as in the books he is still this weak little twerp... Now what about Snape? In the books he is definitly ugly and very unattractive... Alan Rickman, although not a handsome man in the conventional sense, is very attractive and damned sexy. Now Astrofiammante again: I hope this is not considered too off-topic - I believe it is about our perception of character rather than discussion of the films. I shall try to keep it brief, as I know this kind of post has caused arguments in the past. Essentially, the films break the golden rule of 'the camera on Harry's shoulder'. Occasionally you see things happen from Draco's point of view. Two examples: the first potions lesson, when the camera lingers on his smiling face during Snape's Shakespearian soliloquy. He's obviously going to be thrilled with potions. The second is at the duelling club when Snape sweeps forward to banish the snake. Draco looks up at Snape with a desperate expectation of approval for conjuring it - but gets shoved bodily to the ground instead. And remember Malfoy Pere's expression when Draco can't get the snitch off Harry in the quidditch match? No wonder we feel more sympathetic than we should towards the horrible little bully. Similarly Alan Rickman - he seems like the obvious choice for Snape at first, doesn't he? Who would turn him down for their film? But two people of my acquaintance made the very intelligent comments that he would actually have been far better saved up and cast as 'dead sexy' Sirius while the English comic actor Tony Robinson (Baldrick of Blackadder fame) would in fact have made an ideal Snape. Astrofiammante From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 11 18:00:51 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:00:51 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: <000901c3a8a1$20d86740$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84634 "K" wrote: > I think the problem is not that Molly is a stay at home mother with all the domestic and motherly attributes of a domestic goddess but rather that (at least until OoP) there were very very few strong female characters of any kind. In the wizarding world the impression was that as a woman you could be a teacher, a nurse or a mother. Hermione was the only schoolgirl we saw who didn't fit into a stereotypical giggling girly mould. In OoP Ginny was developed into a storng character, I'm reserving judgement on Luna and McGonagall became much more than just a teacher. Umbridge and Bellatrix gave us some female bad guys and a past female Minister for Magic was mentioned. >but that doesn't change the fact > that ... the WW was fairly sexist. > I just don't see things this way. Maybe I've read too much fanfic and my impressions are tainted by that, but overall in my reading of the Potterverse, I've found a refreshing *lack* of attention paid to one's gender. Harry & Ron can be buddies with a girl. Quidditch is *filled* with female players. (Where does one see that in the RW's sports, at least where it's not even QUESTIONED but just IS?) The Wizengamot icludes many female members. The Order includes Molly, McGonagall & Tonks, an auror. Pre-Umbridge, McGonagall takes over in DD's stead, NOT Snape or Flitwick or one of the other male teachers. Umbridge--awful person that she is--is clearly in a position of power. The DA includes girls without reservation or protest, again something which would likely be questioned in many parts of the RW. I feel Ginny turning into a very strong young woman; Luna is definitely her own person; Hermione has a wide open future ahead of her; .... One reason we see so few examples of what WW moms [whoops--mums] do is that these books take place in large part at boarding school. Parents aren't around; their daily lives aren't discussed much. We have no clue what Mrs. Diggory does or Mrs. Finnigan or Mrs. Thomas or Mrs. Patil or Mrs. Brown. No, JKR doesn't tell us these things, but what, really, would they add to the story? How/when would they fit in? JKR has kept the Order's membership pretty small to this point (for who knows what reason--to keep the number of characters manageable?), so until/unless that circle expands to include lots of other Hogwarts kids' parents, we'll likely never know what Mrs. X does--**or MR. X for that matter**. That doesn't make the WW--or JKR- -sexist, im(never-)ho. Siriusly Snapey Susan From ambiree at students.bradley.edu Tue Nov 11 18:03:35 2003 From: ambiree at students.bradley.edu (ambiree at students.bradley.edu) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 12:03:35 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Do Wizards Always...? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1068573815.3fb1247721d49@webmail.bradley.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 84635 > > Sandrranch wrote: Do wizards always make noise when they apparate and disapparate? They were at the train station right? Is it possible that Hagrid was near the platform @ 9 3/4 and just walked through there? -- Amber ***"The GWE has Spoken."--The GWE*** From nibleswik at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 17:52:10 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:52:10 -0000 Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint by ha... In-Reply-To: <1cc.13fb0aef.2ce13a3a@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84636 > > What could make Snape favor the child of a DE? Cassie: > Snape is a double agent who has made friends with Lucius in order > to get information from Voldy's inner circle and "likes" Draco so > no one will get suspicious. Besides, he favours everyone in his >own house-Slytherin-so it would be odd if he singled Draco out, >especially when he is the son of his 'best friend'. Me (Cheekyweebisom): Yes, but that's so boring! Wouldn't you rather that both Snape and Draco are putting on acts than that it's just Snape? Besides, there's always been a specific focus on how much Snape favors Draco. I don't remember him showering praise (as much as Snape ever does) and points on Millicent Bulstrode. Even if he had to tolerate Draco, he doesn't need to make him his apparent favorite. Furthermore, how effective a double agent can he be when LV knows he's on DD's side? Cassie: > Keep in mind, as far as we know Lucius (or any other DE for that >matter) doesn't know that Snape is working against LV now. Me (Cheekyweebisom): Didn't they figure it out from LV's comments in book 4? I don't have my books, so I can't give the exact quote, but in the chapter where LV's risen and he gathers all his DEs, he stands in front of the empty spot and talks about the missing ones -- the Lestranges, in Azkaban, Barty Crouch, Jr., his most faithful servant, who's at Hogwarts, Karkaroff, the coward, and "the one who I believe has left me forever. He will be killed, of course.", or something like that. He didn't say "Severus Snape", and I suppose it could be someone else, but it seems unlikely. Don't you think LV would have told Lucius, in any case, not to go telling Snape things? Cassie: > Also, remember Draco is a spoiled brat. XP Me (Cheekyweebisom): Sorry, I don't quite understand how that would affect Snape's treatment of him. If anything, shouldn't that make him dislike Draco more, as Snape wasn't a spoiled brat? Cheekyweebisom From nibleswik at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 17:59:21 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:59:21 -0000 Subject: Which House Was Sirius In? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84637 > This is Sirius talking about Snape: > (US Edition, Chapter 27: Padfoot Returns, p. 531) > "Snape [ . . . ] was part of a gang of Slytherins > who nearly all turned out to be Death Eaters." Thank you so much for that quote! Oh, joy! I had forgotten that. Sirius, who seems to me an absolutely stereotypical Gryffindor, implying in his speech, which is most likely biased against Slytherins, that they don't all become evil. A gang within Slytherin went bad, but it isn't all of them. How refreshing, especially when contrasted with the Slytherins of Harry's era. They all seem to be either evil or well on their way to becoming it. Cheekyweebisom From nibleswik at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 18:15:01 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:15:01 -0000 Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint b... In-Reply-To: <25.409bb3f7.2ce19c40@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84638 > > My point, though, is that if Snape has to choose between hating > > James Potter's kid and hating Lucius Malfoy's, he'd choose Malfoy's. > >Even if Snape hates Harry, he shouldn't favor Draco for hating Harry > > when he should see Draco as worse. Cassie: > Why, though? Again I have to point out: > > Snape is friends with Lucius. Even if it is a false friendship or >he's just using Lucius to get to LV for information, he's still friends with him Me (Cheekyweebisom): But it makes NO SENSE that he'd be friends with Lucius. LV knows he's on DD's side, or it's at least a reasonable assumption to say he does, given what he said in book 4 about the various missing DEs ("This one, I believe, has left me forever. He will be killed, of course.", or something like that). Why, then, wouldn't LV tell Lucius not to tell Snape anything important? That could certainly jeopardize a lot. And if LV warned Lucius, Lucius would no longer be buddy-buddy with Snape, would he? I mean, I suppose both Snape and Lucius could be bluffing, but it seems iffy. In any case, though, I don't see why we should believe that Snape's getting information from Lucius. Cassie: > Draco is a Slytherin. Snape favours his students in his house- Slytherin. It > would be odd for him to single out and hate Draco. Me (Cheekyweebisom): But there's a huge middle area between "single out and hate" and "make his absolute favorite", isn't there? Why couldn't he treat Draco like he treats . . . Millicent Bulstrode, or any number of less notable Slytherin types? Cassie: > Maybe he does like Draco. Me (Cheekyweebisom): Right. Maybe he does like Draco. But WHY would he? I think there's something JKR hasn't yet told us about Snape and Draco's relationship. And I don't think it's going to be revealed in steamy slash scenes. Cassie: > I think you are suggesting that Snape should hate Draco because his father is > with LV, whom he is against. Me (Cheekyweebisom): Yes, that's exactly what I'm suggesting. I'm further suggesting that he must have some motivation beyond "I'm a double agent". Since that's the only motivation we know about, he must have some motivation we don't know about. The reason it must be beyond "I'm a double agent" is because he can't be a particularly useful double agent if LV knows he's a double agent, can he? (See above.) Cassie: > Are you also suggesting that Snape should NOT hate Harry because his father > with against LV, like Snape? Me (Cheekyweebisom): Absolutely not. Snape can hate Harry as much as he likes. I was using Harry and his father to draw a parallel with Draco and his. I'm saying that Snape, who hates Harry because his dad was an asshole, should REALLY hate Draco, whose dad is a murderer working for Snape's enemy. That was the point of the Harry thing. Cheekyweebisom From kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 18:39:23 2003 From: kateydidnt2002 at yahoo.com (kateydidnt2002) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:39:23 -0000 Subject: Lupin After All? was: Responsibility for Sirius's Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84639 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "entropymail" wrote: >> Let's not forget 6)Lupin. > > We all assume that the second shot, which kills Sirius, comes from > Bellatrix's wand. Harry certainly assumes this. But the passage > doesn't actually say this. JKR even has Dumbledore conveniently > looking the other way until Sirius has already been hit. Could Lupin > have been standing behind Bellatrix and shot Sirius from that > position? Or, perhaps Lupin was aiming at Bellatrix from behind, in > order to defend his friend, but missed and hit Sirius >accidentally? Well, it is an interesting theory, but I have a few problems with it. If it was premeditated and not accidental, like your final suggestion, what possible motive would Lupin have? And another problem-that's just too cruel. JKR has already shown betrayal among friends, why would she do it again here with Lupin killing Sirius? I don't agree with your theory that it was Lupin, but I do agree it is not necessarily Bellatrix. I was just looking back at OotP and she says in the MoM Atrium "What did you come after me for, then? I thought you were here to avenge my dear cousin." Which does lend credence to the theory that it was not necessarily Bellatrix. Although...I feel a fanfic being born in my mind based on this theory... Kateydidnt From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 02:46:06 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:46:06 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping References: Message-ID: <000b01c3a8c7$2372f300$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84640 Siriusly Snapey Susan > > I just don't see things this way. Maybe I've read too much fanfic > and my impressions are tainted by that, but overall in my reading of > the Potterverse, I've found a refreshing *lack* of attention paid to > one's gender. Harry & Ron can be buddies with a girl. Quidditch is > *filled* with female players. (Where does one see that in the RW's > sports, at least where it's not even QUESTIONED but just IS?) The > Wizengamot icludes many female members. The Order includes Molly, > McGonagall & Tonks, an auror. Pre-Umbridge, McGonagall takes over in > DD's stead, NOT Snape or Flitwick or one of the other male teachers. > Umbridge--awful person that she is--is clearly in a position of > power. The DA includes girls without reservation or protest, again > something which would likely be questioned in many parts of the RW. > I feel Ginny turning into a very strong young woman; Luna is > definitely her own person; Hermione has a wide open future ahead of > her; .... > K There was a reason I stressed that these were my pre-OoP feelings. Before OoP we really didn't know much about Molly and Minerva beyond the superficial details that one was a mum and the other a teacher. The only female character I really felt I knew was Hermione whereas we had Harry and Ron for the boys and then Neville and Draco. The twins weren't very fleshed out but I still felt I knew them better than Ginny. And amongst the staff we had Albus, Snape, Hagrid. For the ghosts the only ones who really got any 'screentime' were Nick and Peeves. Quidditchwise we don't really know much about the female players, the characters were never fleshed out (and I don't mean they needed a lot of time devoted to them, just the odd line that tells us something about them) - the players we really saw were the Twins, and Oliver (and Harry and Draco obviously). James is the character Harry seems curious about, not Lily. Then we have Remus and Sirius and Peter (we know nothing of Lily's friends) Really we saw the female characters other than Hermione so little and what we did see didn't tell us anything about them. It's fine to have background characters we don't know much about, but do *all* the female characters other than Hermione have to fall in that category? Before OoP when we do see the women we see the 'mother' and the 'nurse' and the 'librarian', not to mention the 'adoring fan' (Ginny) and the 'giggly girls', and that's *all* we get to see of them. Even Madam Hooch (who after all is associated with quidditch about which we hear a lot) doesn't get fleshed out. I was delighted with the character developments and throwaway comments in OoP that gave us a female MoM, witches on the Wizengamot, Umbridge, a much more detailed Minerva, more about Molly, a fleshed out kick-ass Ginny, Loony Luna and Tonks. Siriusly Snapey Susan > One reason we see so few examples of what WW moms [whoops--mums] do > is that these books take place in large part at boarding school. > Parents aren't around; their daily lives aren't discussed much. We > have no clue what Mrs. Diggory does or Mrs. Finnigan or Mrs. Thomas > or Mrs. Patil or Mrs. Brown. No, JKR doesn't tell us these things, > but what, really, would they add to the story? How/when would they > fit in? JKR has kept the Order's membership pretty small to this > point (for who knows what reason--to keep the number of characters > manageable?), so until/unless that circle expands to include lots of > other Hogwarts kids' parents, we'll likely never know what Mrs. X > does--**or MR. X for that matter**. That doesn't make the WW--or JKR- > -sexist, im(never-)ho. > K But we do know what Mr Diggory does and Mr Thomas. The only mother whose job we knew was Hermione's mother, and she was a muggle. I'm not talking about spending much time and space on giving us details of the characters. Ginny's comment about being possessed by Tom gave us an insight into her in *one* line, the scenes at grimmauld place between Molly and Sirius and Molly and Remus took up hardly any room in comparison to what they showed us. A prime example of this use of one liners to give us insight into characters is Gred and Forge's comment about Oliver trying to drown himself in the showers, that reinforced our whole image of him in one line and he wasn't even *in* the scene, Minerva's line that 'it unscrews the other way' is another one-liner that tells us a lot about her, same with the comments about Flitwick and the swamp. JKR's genius is in creating characters that we feel we know (if we didn't we wouldn't spend so much time arguing over their orientation, past, future, houses etc) but before OoP the only female character I could honestly say I knew was Hermione, with Minerva coming in a distant second. I was getting heartily sick of the women in the Potterverse being relegated to the background, fading into the scenery and being pigeonholed in nurturing stereotypical roles with no chance of us seeing them as anything more than that. K From manawydan at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 11 18:54:07 2003 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:54:07 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] asking the question References: <1068503076.20497.11029.m17@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001f01c3a885$32d459c0$84e66151@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 84641 bboy_mn wondered: > So we really have two questions and two approaches- > > One is, what would you like to ask that she is likely to answer, and > the other is what would you personally really like to know. > > Which brings up a whole new question, if you ask your secret question > and she gave you the secret answer, would you regret knowing it? Would > you regret having that mystery solved before you read it in the book? > > So maybe we should each ask two questions- Mine would be > What is you public question for JKR? Where does the Ministry get its money from? Where does Hogwarts? (I know that's two questions, but the subject's the same really...) > What is your private question for JKR? What happened to Harry's _grandparents_? (A question that I think would also answer some others!) Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From mail at chartfield.net Tue Nov 11 18:56:27 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:56:27 -0000 Subject: Recognising evil (Was Fate of HANDSOME guys) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84642 Mandy said: >It's what makes the dark side so appealing and dangerous a threat I suppose. Personally my superficial self is itching to join the Death Eaters. Now Astrofiammante: I have to say that I found this statement pretty frightening at first glance. To me JKR's portrayal of the Death Eaters is terrifying in its implications. But on second glance I think that you might be arguing that the Death Eaters' glamour is just that - superficial and to be resisted? But making them more seductively dangerous? Personally I find Lucius Malfoy in particular an abhorrent character, especially if you realise that he was aged only about 26 in 1980, at the height of things. I can, just about, see an argument for JKR making the Death Eaters superficially glamorous so we can see the appeal, understand how the process worked, how Voldemort got his supporters. But I'm not sure I buy that - the Imperius curse, fear, manipulation, blackmail all seem more convincing, somehow. These people, in the time when Voldemort was in power, were the death squads, preying on people who wouldn't stick to their rules on racial purity, murdering and torturing. Tacitly supported by the influential families. They were the knock on the door in the middle of the night if you refused to conform to, or happened not to fit, their ideal of what was 'acceptable'. And I think that bringing this home is a major point of the books. Arthur Weasley says it all when he recalls how terrifying it was/would be to come home and see the Dark Mark hovering over your house (are we yet to learn what the Weasleys suffered during that time? Did they lose one or more children to Voldemort and his death squads?) I just can't see them as cool, even on the surface. Just think about Neville's distress after he's witnessed Imposter! Moody demonstrating the Cruciatus Curse. Or Hagrid being subjected to Azkaban. Alice Longbottom and the bubblegum wrapper. Or the campsite owners being spun around in mid-air at the Quidditch World Cup, and Draco's threats to Hermione that she might join them. Regulus Black annihilated because he'd outlived his usefulness. Alastor Moody's photo of the original Order, where almost everyone has been killed - picked off one by one, I think Lupin says. Not a particularly glamorous list, I will admit. But let's be clear what we're talking about here - the worst that human (or wizard) nature is capable of. I think one of the big themes of the novels is how passive resistance to evil is not enough - we actually have to take an active stance against it. Myself, I hope the Death Eaters are wiped from the face of the earth before the end of the series. To quote Mandy again: >I imagine Voldemort's team being populated with these tall, gorgeous, superficially beautiful people with black hearts of coal and Dumbledore's side with short, plain looking good people. Do we really hate beautiful people that much? Do we all secretly long to be included with them? I don't know if you've ever read Terry Pratchett's Lords and Ladies, but this is exactly the process he's describing with the superficially glamorous but deeply evil Elves in that book - which would make an interesting point of comparison. With all good wishes Astrofiammante From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 11 19:01:25 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:01:25 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: <000b01c3a8c7$2372f300$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84643 > Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > > I just don't see things this way. Maybe I've read too much fanfic > > and my impressions are tainted by that, but overall in my reading > > of the Potterverse, I've found a refreshing *lack* of attention > > paid to one's gender. THEN K WROTE: > There was a reason I stressed that these were my pre-OoP feelings. > Before OoP we really didn't know much about Molly and Minerva > beyond the superficial details that one was a mum and the other a > teacher. The only female character I really felt I knew was > Hermione.... > It's fine to have background characters we don't know much about, > but do *all* the female characters other than Hermione have to fall > in that category? > I was delighted with the character developments and throwaway > comments in OoP that gave us a female MoM, witches on the > Wizengamot, Umbridge, a much more detailed Minerva, more about > Molly, a fleshed out kick-ass Ginny, Loony Luna and Tonks. > BACK TO Siriusly Snapey Susan: > > One reason we see so few examples of what WW moms [whoops--mums] > > do is that these books take place in large part at boarding > > school. Parents aren't around; their daily lives aren't > > discussed much. We have no clue what Mrs. Diggory does or Mrs. > > Finnigan or Mrs. Thomas or Mrs. Patil or Mrs. Brown. No, JKR > > doesn't tell us these things, but what, really, would they add to > > the story? How/when would they fit in? JKR has kept the Order's > > membership pretty small to this point, so until/unless that > > circle expands to include lots of other Hogwarts kids' parents, > > we'll likely never know what Mrs. X does--**or MR. X for that > > matter**. That doesn't make the WW--or JKR--sexist, im(never-)ho. > > > AND MORE K: > But we do know what Mr Diggory does and Mr Thomas. The only mother > whose job we knew was Hermione's mother, and she was a muggle. I'm > not talking about spending much time and space on giving us details > of the characters. Ginny's comment about being possessed by Tom > gave us an insight into her in *one* line, the scenes at grimmauld > place between Molly and Sirius and Molly and Remus took up hardly > any room in comparison to what they showed us. A prime example of > this use of one liners to give us insight into characters is Gred > and Forge's comment about Oliver trying to drown himself in the > showers, that reinforced our whole image of him in one line and he > wasn't even *in* the scene, Minerva's line that 'it unscrews the > other way' is another one-liner that tells us a lot about her, same > with the comments about Flitwick and the swamp. Siriusly Snapey Susan again: Not much I could snip in the last part, because it is very good! NOW I understand more of what you were trying to get at, K. And I hadn't recognized your emphasis on pre-OoP [sorry!]. I think your point is well-taken that women were, by & large, background characters before OoP. I still think I'm right that, when all 5 books are included, those females who were present were refreshingly able to join in anything [Quidditch, aurors, DA, Wizengamot], but you're also right that we don't get much information about them, nor their POVs. Of course, we don't much of anyone's POV besides Harry's.... I think you're dead-on, though, in pointing out that JKR has proven herself capable of telling us a lot in ONE line--your examples are perfect [Ginny, McGonagall, Wood], and that makes your annoyance much more understandable to me. BTW, in total agreement w/ you on "kick-ass Ginny"! Siriusly Snapey Susan From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 11 19:09:55 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:09:55 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84644 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith wrote:..."I beg of you, in the bowels of Christ, consider that you may be wrong."... The Sergeant Majorette says That's right up there with "Thou mere white curd of asses' milk," which has been cracking me up for the last 40 years. But seriously, you must know that we Americans *cannot* be wrong. We're "concieved in liberty" (A. Lincoln), after all. We have an unassailable response to any hint of an accusation of, oh, what's another word for hypocrisy, sanctimony...? "Well, *that's* different." As for our Molly (to get back OT), it's hard for us over here to remember that the 24-7-365 mom was designed before the industrial revolution split the year into workweeks. Back then men also worked all the time farming or whatever it was people did before synthetic proteins. Besides, what she does is exactly what any noncommissioned officer in the military does, except that she wears what she wants to. Try to imagine how some crusty old master sergeant would respond to Ron's whining about his dress robes in GoF, and I think you'll have Molly's response to the letter.("Fine," snapped Mrs. Weasley. "Go naked. And, Harry, make sure you get a picture of him. Goodness knows I could do with a laugh.") Another point, and how shall I put this delicately? is that this whole political correctness thing may be ethnic, or rather not- ethnic. My background is non-caucasoid half Caribbean, and Molly tickles me to death as she is just like any old-school momma who feeds, hugs or smacks any child she encounters as appropriate. --JDR From mail at chartfield.net Tue Nov 11 19:15:39 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:15:39 -0000 Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Is JKR giving us a hint by ha... In-Reply-To: <1cc.13fb0aef.2ce13a3a@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84645 Cassie said: > You forget option 6: Snape is a double agent who has made friends with Lucius in order to get information from Voldy's inner circle and "likes" Draco so no one will get suspicious. Besides, he favours everyone in his own house-Slytherin-so it would be odd if he singled Draco out, especially when he is the son of his 'best friend'. Keep in mind, as far as we know Lucius (or any other DE for that matter) doesn't know that Snape is working against LV now. Also, remember Draco is a spoiled brat. How about option 7: Severus Snape is a card-carrying member, nay, an elected officer of the Awkward Squad. As such, he resolutely refuses to be pigeonholed. He will damn well favour Draco Malfoy (the Slytherin alpha male) if he wants to and to hell with what we think about it. Part of his beguiling complexity as a character is his contradictions - though we are told again and again that he's on the side of the Order, he hasn't quite surrendered the last of that "little oddball up to his eyes in the dark arts," up to history yet, has he? Astrofiammante (who thinks that if the previous thread about JKR only giving good guys the good lines was on track, Snape is probably due to save the world.) http://www.deadjournal.com/users/astrofiammante From kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 19:21:40 2003 From: kewpiebb99 at yahoo.com (Joan Lau) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:21:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why need more? Re: [HPforGrownups] Stereotyping In-Reply-To: <000901c3a8a1$20d86740$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: <20031111192140.74496.qmail@web40508.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84646 --- Kathryn Cawte wrote: Kathryn: > I think the problem is not that Molly is a stay at home mother with all the > domestic and motherly attributes of a domestic goddess but rather that (at > least until OoP) there were very very few strong female characters of any > kind. In the wizarding world the impression was that as a woman you could be > a teacher, a nurse or a mother. Hermione was the only schoolgirl we saw who > didn't fit into a stereotypical giggling girly mould. In OoP Ginny was > developed into a storng character, I'm reserving judgement on Luna and > McGonagall became much more than just a teacher. Umbridge and Bellatrix gave > us some female bad guys and a past female Minister for Magic was mentioned. > I'm all for women following nurtut#ring professions or being stay at home > mums if they want but that was the *only* image that we were getting and > that was wrong, especially I feel in a childrens book. I don't think JKR did > it deliberately I think it just happened but the book needed some strong > female role-models. Why do you think the book need more strong female role-models? It's not like there isn't any strong female characters at all in the Potterverse, there are plenty already. Would adding more strong female role-models enhance the story or make the plot better? Also, do you think if some of the existed characters in potterverse were written as females, such as Lupin (I pick him because a majority of readers consider him as a positive, nice, strong and perfect person), do you think the HP series will suddenly become a better book just because Lupin was a female? Or how about Dumbledore? May be if Dumbledore was a female than no one would complaint because he's afterall one of the strongest (power and position-wise) person in the potterverse. Do you think the HP seires will be much better with Dumbledore being a female than? So if Molly was written as a working mom, earning as much money, if not more, than Arthur. Does that make the book suddenly all better? What can the fact Molly being a working mom bring into the story? How can the fact she, a working professional, offer more what Harry needs than what she has been already offering in the series right now: motherly love? It really makes no difference to me, working or not working. Being a female reader myself, I can never understand all these complaints and criticism about the need of more strong female role-models. (Hello? Hermione? McGonagal? don't they exist? What more do you need? there are already almost too many characters in the Potterverse already and many don't to get to be developed) I'm just curious why do you think there's such a "need". Do you think it's giving wrong messages to little girls or something? If you think so than can you cite evidence of how little girls won't grow up as strong female just because they read HP? or is it more of a personal thing that you feel you can't related to any of the character because none of the female character are like you, even if you do find a character you feel related to they're males, so that doesn't count? For me, that is never a issue as I don't care what the gender these characters are, I can identify with any character regardless what his/her gender is. Joan PS: Kneasy, thank you for your post, I couldn't agree more. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 11 19:37:42 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:37:42 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Riddle = Slytherin? Message-ID: <1d6.14049204.2ce29486@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84647 twinslove at mindspring.com, comments: ? Hi. New to the list... this always confused me, ? because didn't Ginny open the chamber? Granted ? Riddle used her to open the chamber, but where does ? this "rule" come into place? Also, since it was already ? preciously opened by Riddle, couldn't anyone who ? knows how to talk "snake" know how to open the ? chamber? Technically, only the Heir *could* open the chamber, and through Ginny he did. As we really delve into it in OoP, Ginny recalls what it felt like to be possessed by Voldemort/Riddle. I would think that the Heir could open the Chamber in any form as long as it were he. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 11 19:52:48 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:52:48 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: <000901c3a8a1$20d86740$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84648 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" wrote: > > Me (K) > > If it looks like a rat, sounds like a rat and smells like a rat ..... > People assume that elves are slaves because they are owned by wizarding > families, work for no pay and are unable to leave without the permission of > their owner. Unless you have a definition of slavery different to the one > most people use that pretty much sounds like slavery to me. Kneasy: Brownies (and I believe by extension Elves) belong to the house not the householder. They stay, even if the family moves. They *refuse* pay. Slaves were never punished by giving them freedom. If they had been, all slave societies would have been hot-beds of slave criminality. K > > Money-lending was their profession because they were banned from most other > professions. After this so-called better press they were still seen as > scapegoats by society, banned from paracticing their religion outside of > their own homes, massacred on several occasions and then expelled from the > country. > Kneasy: True to a certain extent, but not after the1500s. Once the dictats of Rome (including blame for the crucifixion, permissable occupations limited to moneylending and banking, public worship forbidden)were consigned to the dust-bin in England and justice got onto an even keel, systematic persecution, usually whipped up by some-one powerful who wanted to renege on their debts, was no longer a problem except when public order broke down. Which was rare. I can't claim that everyone greeted them with open arms, but that was nothing special - the Welsh were treated the same way, as were Scots, Irish and French. And they were equal under the law. > K > While House Elves are no doubt based on Brownies > (see my previous post about JKR and mythology) they have evolved far beyond > the traditional mythology and are slaves. While I have no sympathy with SPEW > as Hermione seems insistent on forcing her views of how they should live on > them with no regard for their opinions, making her no better than the > Malfoys imo, the Elves are slaves, albeit willing slaves in many cases. > Kneasy: Well, we agree on Hermione, at least. Sure, Elves are not exact parallels with Brownies, but I have posted often expressing the belief that there is more to come, that we do not have all the relevent facts. To those who voice unalterable certainty, I repeat the warning that I've made before: I think you're going to have egg on your face, just like Hermione. If I'm wrong I'll apologise, publicly. From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 03:55:14 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:55:14 -0800 Subject: Why need more? Re: [HPforGrownups] Stereotyping References: <20031111192140.74496.qmail@web40508.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003901c3a8d0$ceb024a0$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84649 Joan > > Why do you think the book need more strong female role-models? > It's not like there isn't any strong female characters at all in the Potterverse, there > are plenty already. Would adding more strong female role-models enhance the story or make > the plot better? > Also, do you think if some of the existed characters in potterverse were written as > females, such as Lupin (I pick him because a majority of readers consider him as a > positive, nice, strong and perfect person), do you think the HP series will suddenly > become a better book just because Lupin was a female? Or how about Dumbledore? May be if > Dumbledore was a female than no one would complaint because he's afterall one of the > strongest (power and position-wise) person in the potterverse. Do you think the HP seires > will be much better with Dumbledore being a female than? > K No you're right there is *a* strong female character in HP, Hermione, but until OoP that was it. And yes I think having more than one female we knew something about *would* make the books better, in fact it was one of the things I loved about OoP. And you're missing my point about strong characters - to be a strong character the character doesn't have to be powerful, just fully-fleshed out and in 3d. My point about the women being nurses, teachers and mums is that's *all* they are. We don't get to see them as actual people with emotions. We get no insight into their motivations and desires, we don't know how they think. All we know is the flat 2d image of 'woman as nurturer'. With the exception of Hermione pre-OoP all the female characters faded into the background. After OoP I can see Molly as a strong charactr - JKR hasn't changed anything about her 'job' or role in life to make me see that where I couldn't see it before but she has let me see into her head. I feel I know her know where i didn't before - and frankly I wouldn't want to be on her bad side either. Joan > So if Molly was written as a working mom, earning as much money, if not more, than > Arthur. Does that make the book suddenly all better? What can the fact Molly being a > working mom bring into the story? How can the fact she, a working professional, offer > more what Harry needs than what she has been already offering in the series right now: > motherly love? It really makes no difference to me, working or not working. > K Not if we didn't knwo any more about her than we do already. I don't *care* whether she has a job or not I care that she is a person in her own right and that we see her as that not just 'the mum'. Joan > Being a female reader myself, I can never understand all these complaints and criticism > about the need of more strong female role-models. (Hello? Hermione? McGonagal? don't they > exist? What more do you need? there are already almost too many characters in the > Potterverse already and many don't to get to be developed) I'm just curious why do you > think there's such a "need". Do you think it's giving wrong messages to little girls or > something? If you think so than can you cite evidence of how little girls won't grow up > as strong female just because they read HP? or is it more of a personal thing that you > feel you can't related to any of the character because none of the female character are > like you, even if you do find a character you feel related to they're males, so that > doesn't count? For me, that is never a issue as I don't care what the gender these > characters are, I can identify with any character regardless what his/her gender is. > K Well yes to a certain extent I do believe that there should be female characters that girls can identify with - why should the guys get to have all the 'fun' after all. I didn't like the view we were getting about the WW not because I thought real-world girls would have a problem but because women in the books seemed to get the short end of the stick and have no real opportunities (stereotypical jobs in 'caring' professions or mums and nothing else). And I'm perfectly capable of identifying with characters of all genders and races, it's 2d background characters I can't identify with and it seems a shame to me that pre-Oop that's all the female characters (other than Hermione) were. Please tell me how you could possibly relate to any of the female characters other than Hermione before OoP, it's not possible to relate to someone you know *nothing* about. K From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 11 20:03:11 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:03:11 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Stereotyping Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84650 Kneasy, Albeit, I do agree with a great deal of your post; however, there is a flaw. Slavery *was* a major factor in the UK. Just look at Bristol. Remember, JKR is a very educated woman, and although she does use a great deal of folklore from around Britain and Europe, I wouldn't place bets that she only derives her creativity from these lines. However, even if she does, we have had a bit of enslaved servitude in the UK. On the stereotyping of women in the roles of society, this is a common theme anywhere. I don't think less of Molly because she made a choice to raise a large family rather than join the MM, but again, we also don't know if she held a position anywhere before she began having children. So to say that she has only ever been a house wife and mother, wouldn't be fair. ( and I do not mean that statement in condescension) As, for your comment on the baddies, I completely agree with you... we need them! But all in all, I *do* agree with what you have said. I think that it may be easier for me, having moved to the states to understand both sides of the discussions; however, we do have many differences... not just the language. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 04:09:58 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:09:58 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping References: Message-ID: <000c01c3a8d2$e85fb210$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84651 > Kneasy: > Brownies (and I believe by extension Elves) belong to the house > not the householder. They stay, even if the family moves. > > They *refuse* pay. > > Slaves were never punished by giving them freedom. If they had > been, all slave societies would have been hot-beds of slave criminality. > K Elves belong to a family. They are *owned* by that family. They have no choice in the matter. I don't care whether they want to be there or not (and neither do most of their owners) they are still slaves. > > Kneasy: > True to a certain extent, but not after the1500s. Once the dictats of > Rome (including blame for the crucifixion, permissable occupations > limited to moneylending and banking, public worship forbidden)were > consigned to the dust-bin in England and justice got onto > an even keel, systematic persecution, usually whipped up by some-one > powerful who wanted to renege on their debts, was no longer a problem > except when public order broke down. Which was rare. > I can't claim that everyone greeted them with open arms, but that was > nothing special - the Welsh were treated the same way, as were Scots, > Irish and French. And they were equal under the law. > K True, but you specifically said 'after the Italiens started lending money' and that was *before* the expulsion of the Jews in, ugh, not sure about the date 13th Century though I believe. > Kneasy: > Well, we agree on Hermione, at least. > Sure, Elves are not exact parallels with Brownies, but I have posted often > expressing the belief that there is more to come, that we do not have > all the relevent facts. To those who voice unalterable certainty, I repeat > the warning that I've made before: I think you're going to have egg on > your face, just like Hermione. If I'm wrong I'll apologise, publicly. > > K We know from canon that elves belong to families and cannot be free without the owner freeing them. That makes them slaves. Elves appear to be quite powerful magically so I think we will see more about them later - I don't think we'll see a rebellion because that would be a rather facile way of clearing up the ethical questions around them (hey they no longer want to be slaves, guess SPEW can be established after all). Personally I wouldn't favour freeing them anyway, most of them are happy and if it ain't broke and all that. I do think they should have some kind of legal rights so that elves, like Dobby or even Kreacher, who don't want to work for the family they are with can find themselves another family. K From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 20:15:12 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:15:12 -0000 Subject: Do Wizards Always...? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84652 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "S & R Ranch" wrote: > Do wizards always make noise when they apparate and disapparate? > > ...edited... > > What do you think? > > sandrranch bboy_mn: My theory is that the sound is in proportion to the amount of effort needed to make apparation/disapparation happen. The twins make a great deal of noise when the appear and disappear because they are new at it and they are giving it an extra effort because they like the loud noise and they like showing off. Dumbledore and Voldemort on the other hand appear and disappear with noise that's hardly more than the 'swish' of a cloak. So, an extremely powerful and experienced wizard can come and go with very little noise. Elves are a completely different matter, I still think that more effort=more noise, but elves have their own type of magic that I suspect isn't always directly comparable to wizard magic. There are a lot of things I want to know about the nature of magical travel, and I'm looking forward to the next book when I assume Harry, Ron, and Hermione will start studying Apparation. This will be the first chance we've had to experience it from inside the head of a person while they apparate. Just a thought. bboy_mn From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Tue Nov 11 17:44:35 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 11:44:35 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Stereotyping References: Message-ID: <00be01c3a87b$7adc2f40$43069e40@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84653 > B Arrowsmith said: > > >Stereotyping. > > > >By the posters. > > *the rest is snipped* Iggy here: I figgured that it would be easier here to simply do a more generalized reply here than to try and address more specific commentary. 1: Human beings are, by nature, at least moderately hypocritical. This is not intended as an insult, it is simply a statement. We tend to see our own set of guidelines for life as being the right ones, and judge others accordingly. (Though we truly have no right to instruct others to live right until we can do it ourselves.) Unfortunately, we also tend to be a bit blind to our own failings and shortcomings when held up to the light of our own standards. It is something that, at least IMHO, everyone in the world is guilty about to some degree or another. Also, IMHO, if we admit this hypocrisy and try to work to improve ourselves and lessen it, then it's ok. When we are self-righteous in that hypocrisy... seeing all the flaws in others but completely unable, or unwilling to see it in ourselves... that it's unacceptable. 2: Regarding the "house elves slavery" issue. IMHO, they are slaves... or perhaps along the lines of indentured servants. They have come to accept this as a way of life, some are treated very well, some are ignored for the most part, and some are abused. Some are happy with their lot in life, some want to change it and improve things, and some are just plain nuts. When you really look at this, it's not much different than the slavery of the blacks in early America. It's also a lot like the serfs in most European cultures... or even just the peasants that lived on a lord or lady's land. (Yeas, even in Britain.) It can also be seen as very similar to the conditions in which many people are willfully employed to this day in "first world" cultures all the way down to the "third world." Some people love their jobs, some hate them, some simply accept it, and some are plain nuts. I've worked for employers who have treated me very well, some who have treated me as no more than an average employee, and some who have been almost as bad as Lucius Malfoy. It's a fact of life. It's not right, but it's life. 3: General images of "slavery": While slavery in the manner formalized and recognized in the US didn't exist in the UK, per se, it still existed. Serfdom, indentured servitude, and an "enforced lordship" all did. None of those are much different from slavery. The lord of a demesnes, wealthy merchants, court nobles, churchmen, and retainer knights were all pretty much allowed to treat the lower class as they wished without fear or retribution or reprisals. If peasants tried to rise up and rebel, they were maimed, imprisoned, or killed outright. Not to mention that no rebellion would last long, since the upper class had the weapons, armor, forts, and training to beat down 99% of any uprising pretty easily, especially when you consider that the closest things to weapons the peasants were allowed to keep were farm implements and household utensils. The lower class did not own the land on which they lived, had no true rights, and the vast majority of what they grew went to feed their lord and his retainers. This was also a method in which the lords kept their serfs hungry enough that they didn't have the health or energy to form an uprising. And this went on for quite some time after the Romans left the UK. The only real difference between this and the slavery practiced in the early years of the US, is in the name... not in the practice. 4: On motherhood and sexism issues: Yes, sexism exists. No, it is not right. Yes, it has existed for thousands of years. No, it's not likely to change overnight. Yes, many countries in the world have made great strides in sexual equality. No, not all countries accept the need to do so. I would also like to point out that sexism also works both ways, and many men have been criticized and degraded by others because of their own views and choices. (I speak from repeated... and repeated... and repeated... personal experience here.) A woman does not have to be a CEO, a successful businesswoman, or a political figure to be a solid role model. But then, I'd like to point out that neither does a man. A stay at home parent can be just as positive a role model for anyone as a professional. A good parent provides for their children, loves them, takes care of them, sees that their needs are met, answers questions, kisses boo-boos, teaches wrong from right, and disciplines their children when needed. This does not exclude the house-parent, or the professional. Just because Molly chooses to be a house-wife does not mean that she's not a strong role-model or a strong woman. It simply means that she chose the path in life that she feels is best for her. A person's strength as a person is not determined by their job, their earning potential, or their education... It's determined by their decisions, their actions, and their character. 5: Stereotyping: Each person needs to be judged on their own merits (if they are to be judged at all) and not as part of a collective. This includes members of a race, gender, sexual orientation, belief system, occupation, or membership on a mailing list. Not all posters set things into stereotypes... unfortunately, it may seem that way at times since often it's easier to speak in generalizations. There is a difference between the two... "Men have beards" is a generalization. "Only manly men have beards" is a stereotype. Both talk about men having beards, but one sets an expectation of a specific personality, social, or other non-physical trait to the possession of a beard that is both unfounded and unrealistic. It is important to look at the written word with a reasonable level of objectivity to determine whether or not someone is using a generalization, or a stereotype. This is not to say nobody uses stereotypes, a number of people do. It's just to say that one should be sure not to assume that all the posters do... because that, in itself, is a stereotype. 6: JKR and Religion: Here's my simplest statement in this letter - While many people of many faiths may say that her books are based on a hero of their religion, the books themselves are based on their beliefs, or that the tenets of a faith are located within her books... until she flat out says "Yes, my books are designed to promote the faith," it's pure speculation and not canon. I think that should cover my views on this. Iggy McSnurd (the MLTA) From nibleswik at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 18:24:12 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:24:12 -0000 Subject: Is Snape a pureblood?, was: Of course Snape is a Slytherin, was: Re: Snape In-Reply-To: <3FB03EEF.80906@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84654 Slytherins are supposed to be cunning, ambitious purebloods. > > The three traits don't automatically spell out evilness. Jazmyn: > Ton Riddle was Slytherin and not a pureblood. I don't think the sorting hat cares > if the person is pureblood as long as they are ambitious and cunning.. Me (Cheekyweebisom): I got the impression that there were occasional halfbloods in Slytherin. I definitely don't see it as, "Ambitious and cunning? Step right up! We don't care about heritage anymore!" Anyway, my original point was that being cunning, ambitious, and a pureblood are all far more important than being evil, and in fact, that it ought to be just as easy to be evil in any of the other houses. If it isn't, I suspect that's at least as much because of how everyone hates Slytherins as any other factor. Jazmyn: > Its a thought that the reason none of the Slytherin students came >to Snape's rescue when James and Sirius tomented him is that, >possibly, Snape is not a pureblood and the pureblood Slytherins >snubbed him. Me (Cheekyweebisom): That's really interesting. I like that idea, though it could have been for any other number of reasons -- he was a goody-goody, for example. That would draw a parallel between Snape and early Hermione, who was taunted by those from her own house. (The reason for said taunting was, of course, that Gryffindors are lovely, honorable, considerate, angelic people.) Cheekyweebisom From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 04:19:33 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:19:33 -0800 Subject: Why *doesn't* Molly work? References: Message-ID: <000701c3a8d4$3ccff2a0$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84655 -Tonks > On the stereotyping of women in the roles of society, this is a common theme > anywhere. I don't think less of Molly because she made a choice to raise a > large family rather than join the MM, but again, we also don't know if she held a > position anywhere before she began having children. So to say that she has > only ever been a house wife and mother, wouldn't be fair. ( and I do not mean > that statement in condescension) > K Actually talking of that. If the weasley's are so broke - why hasn't Molly gone out to work now all her kids are at Hogwarts? I mean with only her and Arthur in the house during the term time and with magic at her disposal, exactly what does she *do* during the day? Obviously now she could be doing OoP stuff, but the order wasn't reformed till after GoF, so that's three years of very little to do. K From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 11 18:56:31 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:56:31 -0000 Subject: Do Wizards Always...? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84656 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "S & R Ranch" wrote: sandrranch: > Do wizards always make noise when they apparate and disapparate? I am > asking because in book five everyone seems to me making noise when > they do so. Also in several of the previous books you read about the > noise...even Dobby the House Elf made a noise when he apparates and > disapparates. Yet he simply appears in the hedge and Harry's bedroom > on Privit Drive with no sound. Geoff: "Harry suddenly sat bolt upright on the garden bench. He has been staring absent-mindedly into the hedge - and the hedge was staring back. Two enormous green eyes had appeared among the leaves." (COS UK edition p.12) This does not necessarily imply that Dobby had just apparated. He could have "landed" a distance away and walked to the point where he could see Harry. In Harry's bedroom, He is /already/ there when Harry goes in. sandrranch: > Yet when Hagrid disappears at the train station in book one there > seem not to be any noise. I honestly don't know how someone of > Hagrid's size could vanish as he did unless he disapparated. Geoff again: But, read the relevant bit again... "Hagrid helped Harry onto the train thatwould take him back to the Dursleys, then handed him an envelope. 'Yer ticket fer Hogwarts,' he said, "First o' September - King's Cross - it's all on yer ticket. Any problems with the Dursleys, send me a letter with yer owl, she'll know where to find me... See yeh soon, Harry.' The train pulled out of the station. Harry wanted to watch Hagrid until he was out of sight; he rose in his seat and pressed his nose against the window but he blonked and Hagrid was gone." (PS UK edition p.66) Even if Hagrid disapparated at that point, Harry wouldn't hear him - the train is moving and making a noise. [One poster has suffered from movie contamination. Hagrid wasn't at KX for the journey in the book.] Geoff From HimemyaUtena at aol.com Tue Nov 11 20:06:05 2003 From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:06:05 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Responsability for Sirius's Death Message-ID: <141.1c480a7e.2ce29b2d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84657 In a message dated 11/11/03 9:54:57 AM Eastern Standard Time, sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk writes: > sachmet96: > I don't see how this makes him not responsible for his own death. He > knew not to leave the house but did it, the reason why he shouldn't > leave it is unimportant imo. He left and dies, so it's his fault. If > he hadn't died then his whereabouts would have been known and he > would have endangered the people who where seen there with him (can't > see the Ministry being happy to see it's people associate with an > wanted man). So he didn't only endanger himself but others as well. > That's irresponsible imo. I'm not a real big Sirius fan. I don't dislike him. I'm pretty neutral. However, I think that you are being a bit hard on him. Sirius cares for Harry as if he were his own son. Reasons for this are numerous, probably having to do with his close relationship with James, a sense of failure with the Fidelius Charm, and also because he probably generally likes Harry. Now, if my daughter were in any kind of trouble, let alone in a life threatening position, I wouldn't care how in danger my own life was, I would go and try to help her. And if I didn't go, and something bad happened to her, I would never forgive myself and would probably not care much about living after that point anyway. I don't know how anyone could expect him to sit idly by when Harry's life was in danger. I also don't see how he was putting anyone else's life in danger by coming along. Adrianna [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From groups at e-dennis.net Tue Nov 11 20:15:21 2003 From: groups at e-dennis.net (Dennis) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:15:21 -0000 Subject: uniforms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84658 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sachmet96" wrote: > > Yolanda > > They don't wear house specific markings. Remember in CoS when > Harry > > and Ron disguised as Slytherins asked a girl where the Slytherin > > common room was and she said she was in Ravenclaw. They never > could > > have mistaken a student from one house for another if they wore > > markings. They wouldn't have had to guess who was a Slytherin in > the > > first place. House markings would have solved that problem easily. > > sachmet96 > I just reread the passage and she sounded to me that she thought they > were stupid to even assume she was Slytherin which implies to me that > it must have been obvious she was a Ravenclaw. > Indeed, it was obvious. In this case, the girl's prefect badge should have certainly obviated that she was a Ravenclaw, for it was none other than Miss Penelope Clearwater. This part was a clue for the plotline of she and Percy seeing each other and writing all summer. Ron and Harry (in disguise) were down the Slytherin hallway searching for a door, so they assumed (incorrectly) that whomever they met would be a Slytherin on their way to the dormitory without looking first to verify this. Fifteen minutes later, they bump into Percy, who had to allow a discreet amount of time before leaving the cozy spot he and Penelope had been visiting all year. As further evidence, I submit the descriptions of the "long, curly hair" found for both the girl coming up from the dungeons, and in the hospital wing, where Harry "recognized her as the Ravenclaw they'd accidentally asked for directions to the Slytherin common room" as McGonagall was leading them to Hermione. I think the suggestion that Percy was only seeking glory by finding the Heir himself was a red herring. To the point, this passage can't tell us anything about uniform standards, as we see this girl was clearly marked, even if no one else is. Perhaps prefect badges don't mark a person's house, even, but surely the fact that it was a prefect would have let them recognize what house she came from. I mean, prefects are students you'd pay enough attention to to know their house, right? -Dennis "I need what? A life. Cool. Where can I download one of those?" From HimemyaUtena at aol.com Tue Nov 11 19:51:47 2003 From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 14:51:47 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: non-human students -- Where are they? Message-ID: <1ea.12f47d64.2ce297d3@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84659 In a message dated 11/11/03 7:23:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: [Carol] > I think the movie has misled (I won't say "tainted") kneazelkid. Look > at the Creevey brothers. Colin is referred to as "little" and Dennis > as "tiny," yet they're muggle-born wizards and therefore human. I > think Professor Flitwick is also human (though probably not muggle > born). There's no indication of his being anything other than a very > small wizard. I think that the casting, or rather the makeup that > makes Warwick Davis look like some sort of gnome, is very misleading. > I picture Filius Flitwick as looking like a tiny, white-bearded Merlin > with the height and body proportions of a slender nine-year-old. > I'm not positive if this is true, but I heard that JKR said in an interview that Flitwick is part Goblin. I can't cite an interview though, so I may be wrong. Has anyone else heard this? Adrianna [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From cristina_angelo at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 20:22:47 2003 From: cristina_angelo at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Cristina_Rebelo_=C2ngelo?=) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:22:47 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Portrait-Person In-Reply-To: <20031111172041.43668.qmail@web40001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84660 Paula: Point in case, why do the portraits speak and move from picture to picture (not to mention the deeds of Riddle from his diary) and photos from The Daily Prophet (as far as I can recall) only wave and change facial expressions. Any ideas? Cristina: I would love to have my own suspects explored by some of the people on the list, who are either amazing at analysis, or have this huge knowledge on so many things, and, I expect, on this... Photos, even if at the beginning some people thoguth coud rob their souls, are a moment taken / snapped/ shot out of reality into a film, which I'd say is something more technically advanced than the technical/ chemical process of colouring a canvas. I know there is so much to be said about this... A photo is also a bit of the soul of the person who actually takes it... I always remeber one of my film professors talking about films filmed in video and not actual film, and how, for instance, simply knowing that you were working with a less expensive material could, in his purist eyes (vice director of Lisbon's Cinemateca), make a director not feel that rush of I have to get this right in only a few shots, as in cinema being also that moment of brilliant meeting of chance and something that erupted from the insides of the enrire crew under that stress/ rush (well, this professor never really explained why exactly Chaplin, who would make dozens of takes despite film price was still as if a god for him) But portraits, and the good ones, always have more soul into them, not only the artist, the eye of the artist. The stroke of the brush is magical itself. There is something else, other than the mere presence of the person whose portrait is being taken - and I'm thinking "striking a pose", having that stranger, more privileged feeling of posing for a portrait than of posing for a photo; which makes me think, portraits are special, usually expensive moments, normally eavy with social status, and photos also had that special status in the beginning, even if photography was the poor "art" relative of painting, but the choice of who actually had their photo taken was something special, you were someone else because you had be chosen or you could have your photo taken (I'm not taking into account the use of photography for ethnological/ study reasons), and maybe early photos and daguerreotypes (sp), etc, in the WW could have this same live-in person as portraits. IMO this has to do with definitions of art, of which I have only a rough idea, and would love to see explored by people who know. As art, in this case paintings, as with some sort of magic - as a meeting of technics and spiritual, where the artist is but/also a medium of something higher. IMO, paintings are meetings of both artist and portraied person souls with something else (call it God, Human Conscience, whatever), and if you put magical souls into the equation (magical souls who have access to some other dimension), stranger things can happen, like a more witnessable continuity of the spirit of the person (and then, is that spirit only an image of the person's evolution, personality at the moment, or can it grow, refeclting the person's interior growth after the portrait? I'm thinking of Phineas' "distress" at knwoing Sirus is dead - is that distress linked only to the end of the lineage, or is there a possibility that it has something to do with his actual after death grown love for Sirius?). Maybe the photos are not as magical as paintings (which would difer if it was a photograph or a painter talking), or maybe wizards take the phtos as something so normal they simply choose not to put their souls into them (and could that resist the reproduction of the photos, however intense?). If you look at least at Presidents and Monarchs (and the Pope), is the choice of always having an official painted portrait as well as the official photo innocent, or simply social status based? Isn't there something else?... I hope this can make sense to anybody else but me... C *** Cristina Rebelo ?ngelo HYPERLINK "http://www.cangelo.novelcity.com/"www.cangelo.novelcity.com / ICQ 106255886 / Yahoo Messenger cristina_angelo / Fax (USA) 001-425-920-0285 HPGCv1 a31 e++ x+ -- z+++ A27 Rhp HPa S+++ Mo HaP++ HG++ RW++ AD++ RH+++ VK& NhN& SB& DM--- O++ F sfD Any attached file not mentioned in the body of the message may be a virus; if present, delete it for the sake of your computer, and inform the sender. Thank you. "Quand on n'a que l'amour/ Pour tracer un chemin/ Et forcer le destin/ A chaque carrefour Quand on n'a que l'amour/ Pour parler aux canons/ Et rien qu'une chanson/ Pour coinvancre un tambour Alors sans avoir rien/ Que la force d'aimer/ Nous aurons dans nos mains/ Amis le monde entier" J.Brel 1956 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 06/11/2003 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 11 20:23:00 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:23:00 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Lupin & Snape (was: Wormtail's silver hand ) Message-ID: <16e.262bc9c8.2ce29f24@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84661 In reference to your comment: ? > Carol wrote: > > > There is no solid ? evidence that he's a vampire... I don't mean to be > ? > rude or dismissive, but I don't understand why ? anyone would want him > > to be a vampire. ? What is the attraction of this theory? > > then Berit: ? > > I myself am not atttracted to the idea of ? Snape beng a vampire, and I > really hope he is not ? :-) The only "real" clue for him being a > vampire (or ? a "half vampire") is as I see it the interesting little > ? detail that Lupin assigned a vampire-essay to be ? written by the > class, after Snape had made them ? write an essay about werewolves > clearly wanting ? someone to discover Lupin's identity (the only one ? > who did was Hermione)... It could be Lupin's way ? of "getting back" at > Snape, and it might not. But ? it would be just like Rowling to leave a > clue like ? that in the text :-) > > Personally, I do no think that we have evidentiary support to think that Lupin would be vindictive enough to act as Snape. Although he did not stop his friends from hurting and picking fun of Snape, we don't have much to say that he would act as they did. Even though Lupin was used to bait Snape at school, I always had the impression that he really didn't know about the trick until after the fact. He just doesn't seem the type to set an essay just for the purposes of exposing someone he dislikes. And, really, have you noticed that Lupin deals with Snape much differently than Sirius? Although Snape's dislike of Lupin is plainly evident to everyone, Lupin is always kind and gentle in dealing with Snape. He laughs as though he thinks the pettiness is funny, he is grateful for Snape's potion master abilities and for Snape's procuring Wolfsbane potions for him. Whenever there is discord between Sirius and Snape, Lupin almost always acts peacefully and gently. In fact, the only incident I can recall right now where Lupin raises his voice at Snape is in the Shrieking Shack, when Snape, as per usual, refuses to listen to anyone. I don't know if this gentle nature is something that a young boy, bitten by a werewolf, and forced to live with bouts of werewolf aggression adopted as a way to be what he really wanted or if it is just *in* Lupin's nature. Yet, if we really look at him, although he has done some untrustworthy acts in the past to protect himself and his friends, he has never really been the kind of person I would think to be vindictive in this manner. For, even at his moments of dishonesty, he still had loyalty, love, compassion, and was humble. -Tonks, still supporting Lupin. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 11 20:30:48 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:30:48 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Responsability for Sirius's Death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84662 ? In a message dated 11/11/03 9:54:57 AM Eastern ? Standard Time, sachmet96 at yahoo.co.uk writes: > ? sachmet96: > I don't see how this makes him not ? responsible for his own death. He > knew not to ? leave the house but did it, the reason why he shouldn't ? > leave it is unimportant imo. He left and dies, so ? it's his fault. If > he hadn't died then his ? whereabouts would have been known and he > ? would have endangered the people who where seen ? there with him (can't > see the Ministry being happy ? to see it's people associate with an > wanted man). ? So he didn't only endanger himself but others as well. ? > That's irresponsible imo. And, so did Harry. Harry led his friends and 'students' away from Hogwarts to save Sirius. Sirius left Grimmauld Place to save Harry. See the theme here? What is the magic that truly protects Harry? Love. Without these examples of love, he has no protection. Sirius, although not listening to anyone or anything but his heart, acted on his love for Harry. Why fault him for this? As for endangering the people that were seen with him, I don't believe that any Ministry Official saw him with anyone that night, as he had fallen behind the veil before they arrived. Furthermore, now that Voldemort's return has been acknowledged, I feel that posthumously, Sirius will be cleared. I don't really understand why people pick on Sirius so much. He had a dreadful life, losing everyone that he loved and cared for, then he returns to the WW, he has one of his best friends again, and he has the son of his best friend who plays the role of son/brother/friend to him. Then he is forced into a life of hiding kept away from working to save the WW- something which he had done in his life before-- and he is forced to keep out of contact with Harry. Of course he will flee to be at Harry's aid. He loves him. Nothing anyone could say or do would make Sirius not be there for Harry. Harry needed him in his mind, just as in Harry's mind Sirius needed him. We are seeing great parallels between the way Sirius and Harry think. Faulting one for his action or inaction in OoP is faulting the other, imho. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From two_flower2 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 20:32:32 2003 From: two_flower2 at yahoo.com (two_flower2) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:32:32 -0000 Subject: Why *doesn't* Molly work? In-Reply-To: <000701c3a8d4$3ccff2a0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84663 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" wrote: > > Actually talking of that. If the weasley's are so broke - why hasn't Molly > gone out to work now all her kids are at Hogwarts? I mean with only her and > Arthur in the house during the term time and with magic at her disposal, > exactly what does she *do* during the day? Obviously now she could be doing > OoP stuff, but the order wasn't reformed till after GoF, so that's three > years of very little to do. > > K Actually, it is not clear if she works or not. For all we know, she might have a streamline in enchanted mince pies or love potions. Maybe Rowling doesn't mention her work because it is not important for the story... in the same way the information about female Quidditch players isn't ;) Kneasy, Susan and Joan, thank you for your posts! You put into words the thoughts which I also have had during the months (years!) of lurking on this board. Two2 From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 11 20:35:23 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:35:23 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why *doesn't* Molly work? Message-ID: <22.3f574eb7.2ce2a20b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84664 K comments: ? K Actually talking of that. If the weasley's are so broke ? - why hasn't Molly gone out to work now all her kids ? are at Hogwarts? I mean with only her and Arthur in the ? house during the term time and with magic at her ? disposal, exactly what does she *do* during the day? ? Obviously now she could be doing OoP stuff, but the ? order wasn't reformed till after GoF, so that's three ? years of very little to do. Good question! Except that now, her time really *is* taken up by OoP work. Perhaps she is busy everyday with work for them. We see when she is at Grimmauld Place, she often is cooking, and is almost always cleaning when not in meetings. It may sound like it is just a continuance of her motherly/housewife duties, but someone *has* to perform these tasks. And, I have a sneaking suspicion she far more valuable than we know yet. In GoF, she is one of the first asked for her help by DD. I don't think this is a coincidence. I think that Molly hasn't shown us what she can do yet. But, as for why she hadn't found employment from CoS to OoP, I do not know. Perhaps, she has some kind of work we do not know about? -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mail at chartfield.net Tue Nov 11 20:35:35 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:35:35 -0000 Subject: Of course Snape is a Slytherin, was: Re: Snape In-Reply-To: <3FB03EEF.80906@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84665 Jazmyn wrote: > Snape is not a pureblood Now Astrofiammante: If you give any credence at all to the Perseus Evans anagram (and I realise this is a big if, but I still say it's an uncommonly neat and tidy accident) then it's very hard to see how Severus Snape can be a Pureblood and Lily Evans Muggle-born. Astrofiammante http://www.deadjournal.com/users/astrofiammante From HimemyaUtena at aol.com Tue Nov 11 20:28:43 2003 From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:28:43 EST Subject: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco?/Responsibility for Sirius's death Message-ID: <1a8.1c11d642.2ce2a07b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84666 In a message dated 11/11/03 1:28:11 PM Eastern Standard Time, nibleswik at yahoo.com writes: > (Cheekyweebisom): > But it makes NO SENSE that he'd be friends with Lucius. LV knows > he's on DD's side, or it's at least a reasonable assumption to say > he does, given what he said in book 4 about the various missing DEs > ("This one, I believe, has left me forever. He will be killed, of > course.", or something like that). Why, then, wouldn't LV tell > Lucius not to tell Snape anything important? That could certainly > jeopardize a lot. And if LV warned Lucius, Lucius would no longer be > buddy-buddy with Snape, would he? I mean, I suppose both Snape and > Lucius could be bluffing, but it seems iffy. In any case, though, I > don't see why we should believe that Snape's getting information > from Lucius. [Me: Adrianna] Except that we know Lucius speaks highly of Snape because Umbridge told us so towards the end of OOTP. And I can't find a quote right now, it seems my daughter's run off with the book again... Anyway, we can assume that up until the end of OOTP that Lucius is manipulating the Ministry for his own means. How would it benefit him to talk up Snape to the Ministry if Lucius knew Snape was a traitor? Wouldn't it better suit him to talk badly about Snape to the Ministry. Maybe name him as a supporter of Dumbledore. ***** Katydidnt wrote: > I don't agree with your theory that it was Lupin, but I do agree it > is not necessarily Bellatrix. I was just looking back at OotP and > she says in the MoM Atrium "What did you come after me for, then? I > thought you were here to avenge my dear cousin." Which does lend > credence to the theory that it was not necessarily Bellatrix. I took that more as "Why did you come after me if you're not going to avenge Sirius?" Adrianna [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From abigailnus at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 20:44:11 2003 From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:44:11 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Chapter Five In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84667 Pippin asks: > > 5. Harry seems equally interested in the lighthearted efforts of > > Tonks and Mundungus to entertain the other youngsters, and in > > the more intense, grownup conversations going on. But he > > doesn't take part in any of the talk until Sirius asks him. Why? > > Meri: IMHO, I think this has to do with all that Harry has been > through in the last few days, from the dementor attack, to being > expelled to the ministry hearings to the rescue from Privet Drive. > He's probably just glad to be among people who don't treat him like > dirt and value his company, and he's probably more that glad just to > listen and eat his fill. While I'm sure Harry's ordeals have something to do with it, his choice to stand back and be silent is pretty typical of his behavior. Harry often casts himself in the role of the outsider - and is cast in it by others just as often. Consider his behavior at the very first opening feast. Hermione, who is just as much of an outsider as Harry, is chatting animatedly with Percy, a complete stranger and someone 4 years her senior. Harry, on the other hand, just watches. In fact, Harry rarely seeks the company of others. His closest friendships are ones that he more or less fell into. Ron strikes up a conversation with him on the Hogwarts Express. Hermione spends several weeks intruding on him until his choice to save her life cements their friendship. The same is true for adults - Sirius, Lupin, Molly and Hagrid all seek Harry out, not the other way around. In terms of interpersonal relationships, Harry is a very passive person. This is probably why he's such a bad boyfriend - Cho expects him to take a more active role in their relationship, but Harry prefers to watch other couples then to interact with her. Pippin again: > > 8. Molly and Sirius act like stereotypical parents in this > chapter: > > Molly the overprotective, interfering Mum and Sirius the feckless > > single Dad. Is this consistent with their portrayal in the rest > of > > the series? Are these caricatures harmless entertainment or do > > they foster sexism? > > Meri: I think Molly's is very consitent with how she has been > portrayed in the previous books, but I don't think that she is being > overprotective and interfereing with out good reason. There is a war > going on after all, one of her sons has gone and joined up with a > group dedicated to put the Order down, and now she has Harry, the > prophecy and the Ministry hearings to deal with. Do I think that it > is sexist to show her as a caring, though sometimes overbearing > individual? Another thing that isn't often brought up when discussing Molly's character in OOP is the intense pressure that she's under. In OOP Molly's comforting protectiveness is taken just enough over the top to be shrill and disturbing, and in my opinion it's her fears that are causing it. Her boggart encounter is often brought up as a way of eliciting pity for her, but I think that it shows us exactly what's on her mind. She says herself that she sees her loved ones dead constantly, and I believe that the pressure of it is wearing her down, making her irritable and snippy. In Molly's mind, Sirius is bringing Harry closer to that fate, and therefore she stops at very little to prevent him from doing this. I think Molly is headed for a breakdown myself - she's obviously unused to dealing with this kind of pressure, and being a stiff upper lip type of person, I doubt that she confides much in Arthur. She's keeping her fears bottled up - notice her inability to either vanquish the boggart or recover from its assault, and then her quick demand that Arthur not be told, and her shame at being seen to break down - and, her relatively minor flare-ups in OOP notwithstanding, I wouldn't be surprised if we see her fall apart in some future book. Meri again: Not IMHO. In Sirius' case, however, we have very little > cannon backing up how he and Harry would interact on a father-son > level. In GoF, the only other book where they have significant > contact, that contact is limited to a few fire chats, a cave visit, > and Dumbledore's office after the tragic events, Speaking of Dumbledore's office, has anyone noticed how completely Sirius and Dumbledore switch positions over the summer between GoF and OOP? At the end of GoF, Sirius wants to spare Harry from speaking of his ordeals, but Dumbledore realizes that this is a solution that befits a child, and that Harry the young man can't be protected by silence. In OOP, their attitudes are reversed. I find the change in Sirius' attitude particularly interesting, and I think it lends credence to the theory that he is motivated, at least in part, by a desire to revive James in Harry. I also believe that his stay in Grimmauld Place, where he was a sullen and unhappy teenager, regresses Sirius back to that same sullen and unhappy person, which is why he's so much more mature in GoF then OOP. Abigail From amani at charter.net Tue Nov 11 20:45:57 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:45:57 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Of course Snape is a Slytherin References: Message-ID: <001701c3a894$cf5cd6a0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84668 Jazmyn wrote: > Its a thought that the reason none of the Slytherin students came to > Snape's rescue when James and Sirius tomented him is that, possibly, > Snape is not a pureblood and the pureblood Slytherins snubbed him. > Maybe he did really outstanding in his O.W.L.s after that point and the > young DEs saw him as a tool/resource and decided to overlook his blood. > Volde not being a pureblood either might have been drawn to Snape's > need for revenge and hooked him in. Snape however, was too intelligent > to not realize he was only being used and perhaps Dumbledore turned out > to be the only REAL friend he could turn to. Carol: My impression is that the gang of Slytherins didn't come to Snape's rescue because they were no longer at Hogwarts. Certainly Lucius Malfoy wasn't; he's five or six years older than Snape. In fact, Snape seems to have been a loner as a teenager, or so the Pensieve moment where he's shooting down flies suggests. Taryn: But we DO know he was in a gang of Slytherins whilst in school. Sirius talks about it. My copies of PoA, GoF, and OotP are with a friend or I'd get the quote (in GoF, I believe). (A little help?) Carol: I don't think we have any indication that Snape is not a "pure blood." He wouldn't have called Lily a "mud blood" if his own heritage were questionable. Taryn: I agree here. Although Voldemort does go around using the term and he IS a half-blood, he's also a mentally unstable meglomaniac, which Snape doesn't seem to be. ^_^;; I'd imagine Snape's a pureblood. ---------- Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From amani at charter.net Tue Nov 11 20:49:07 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:49:07 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lexicon Contmaination References: Message-ID: <002101c3a895$404eb7c0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84669 Hermowninny: I believe it's *possible* JKR is leading us to believe James was in Gryffindor, when he may not have been. If he was in fact in Gryffindor, wouldn't she just come out and say it? Why does all the evidence skirt around the subject? Taryn: She may just be assuming that WE will assume James was in Gryffindor. After all, both Lily and Hagrid were in Gryffindor (naturally). I think there ARE some things that can be taken at face value, with the simple and most likely explanation, and that this is one of those things. But I DO understand the debate--JKR's a master of misleading. But I, for my part, don't believe this one's a red herring. ---------- Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From steve at hp-lexicon.org Tue Nov 11 21:05:59 2003 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:05:59 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84670 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > Hi Steve, > I'm going to have to disagree on what makes `canon' and to address > some of your post. I'd like to address you last comment first: > > Steve wrote: > > but honestly, it is extremely strong evidence indeed. > > Now me: > Extremely strong evidence is not `Canon' in my opinion. I may be > splitting hairs but when I use the Lexicon I assume that, unless > otherwise stated, what I am reading is based directly from the books You are correct. Extremely strong evidence is still not canon. I should rewrite the reference to Sirius so that it reflects that uncertainty. > themselves. Movie contamination is sited and I think Lexicon > contamination, or are Lexicon assumptions based on extremely strong > evidence should be sited too. I have many times gone running back to > my books to look up a page that has been quoted along with a > statement, to find the statement is actually an assumption. I don't > wish to discourage assumption but as a Lexicon is a dictionary > shouldn't the results be drawn from events that have taken place? I > will concede that a Lexicon is an ever-evolving entity, but when > making guesses, even educated ones, where does one draw the line > between assumption, theory and fiction? Unfortunately, assumption being what it is, I often don't recognize it for an assumption until someone points it out to me. There are things which I think are perfectly obvious until I hear someone else's assumptions about the same part of the book and realize to my surprise that it is possible to interpret things differently. I honestly have to revise frequently to take these kinds of things into account. > > > Steve wrote: > > James is in Gryffindor. That's given in the book. It's on page 704 > > of the US edition of OP. Ron rumples his hair and Harry grins > > because it reminds him "forcibly of another Gryffindor Quidditch > > player...", which is a reference to James's actions Harry witnessed > > in Snape's memory. > > Now me: > This could easily be a assumption made by Harry who of course wants > his father to be in his house. Part of Harry's quest in the sage is > him seeking to belong, searching for his parents and the family he's > never had. Harry has never assumed James to be anything other than a > Gryffindor. In this case, I think the statement is so darn close to 100% sure that it would take quite a leap of thinking to make this say anything other than the fact that James was a Gryffindor. The Lexicon will contiunue to state that as a canon fact. > > Steve wrote: > > As for Lupin and Sirius, the conversation on page 170 (US) is the > > most telling. Clearly from Sirius' comments, only one of the three > > of them could have been made Prefect, and that one turned out to be > > Lupin. If they were in different houses, Lupin's being made Prefect > > wouldn't have precluded the others from getting a badge too. > > Now me: > `Only one of them could have been made a prefect' is your assumption > based on the conversation that took place between Sirius, Lupin, > Harry, Tonks, and Ginny. What Sirius actually said was "No one would > have made me a prefect, This one is less certain, you are right. But as someone else said in a response, the way it's writte ("Lupin got THE badge") is very, very strong evidence. I grant you that this isn't perhaps strong enough to be called canon, but it is pretty solid. On this one, however, I agree that the Lexicon should not be quite so certain. > > All that being said, I do want to congratulate you on a wonderful job > on collating and displaying the huge amounts of info in the Harry > Potter series and hope you will continue to do so. As I will continue > to use and enjoy the Lexicon. You are very welcome. And I really do appreciate your comments a lot. Writing the Lexicon is not as simple and as cut and dried as some would think. I need and enjoy feedback from many people. Steve who still gets a kick out of the phrase "Lexicon contamination" From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 21:20:28 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:20:28 -0000 Subject: Why *doesn't* Molly work? In-Reply-To: <000701c3a8d4$3ccff2a0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84671 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" wrote: If the weasley's are so broke - why hasn't Molly > gone out to work now all her kids are at Hogwarts? Laura: Maybe by now she doesn't need to-at the beginning of OoP, 3 of the kids are on their own. So maybe the financial pressure is less. The Weasleys obviously made a decision to give up Molly's potential income so that she could be home with the kids. This is a perfectly valid choice, imo, and one that deserves respect. If things had gotten much tighter around the Weasley household, though, Molly might have had to get a job despite her and Arthur's wishes-just like a lot of families in the RW. From MadameSSnape at aol.com Tue Nov 11 21:40:00 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 16:40:00 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Do Wizards Always...? Message-ID: <6d.1c50e05c.2ce2b130@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84672 In a message dated 11/11/2003 11:51:38 AM Eastern Standard Time, psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com writes: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > Sandrranch wrote: > > > Do wizards always make noise when they apparate and disapparate? > > Me: > > I don't think so. I remember the scene where Dumbledore arrives and > departs in Privet Drive at the start of book 1, and there are no loud > cracks at all... He is doing it silently as far as I remember. Maybe > extra skilled wizards (and elves) may apparate/disapparate without a > sound... > > Berit psychobirdgirl(me): So that implies then that Hagrid is extra skilled at apparation, even though it is illegal for him to perform magic and he was never very good at it anyway. This leads me to the conclusion that Dumbledore made him disappear; further conclusion, Dumbledore has a way of watching people from afar and using his magic on them. =========================== Sherrie (who survived auditions): I never thought there was a question about this - IMO, Hagrid simply had a Portkey, provided him by Dumbledore. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From amani at charter.net Tue Nov 11 21:32:34 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 16:32:34 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor References: <00a001c3a873$13ab3a80$43069e40@rick> Message-ID: <009601c3a89b$526bce60$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84673 >Hermowninny: > I don't think JKR ever said James was in Gryffindor in an > interview. > The closest thing I can find is when she was asked "Whiat > position > did James play on the Gryffindor Quidditch team?" She > responded, "James was a chaser." Iggy: If he was a chaser, then why did the plaque in the movie say he was a seeker? Taryn: Silly sentimental creative lisence. It created more of a connection between Harry and his father. Iggy: And why was he shown in OotP playing with the snitch the way he was? Taryn: To show off. How is he supposed to do that with a Quaffle? It's rather large and unwieldy. He's showing off he has good reflexes, even if he doesn't want to play Seeker. (It seems like he COULD play Seeker, but there's no reason he couldn't just prefer the Chaser position.) Iggy: And, while I don't have the books at hand right now, wasn't he mentioned in the books as a seeker a couple of times? Taryn: Nope. ---------- Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 05:48:56 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:48:56 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why *doesn't* Molly work? References: Message-ID: <001301c3a8e0$c3a72e40$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84674 > Laura: > Maybe by now she doesn't need to-at the beginning of OoP, 3 of the > kids are on their own. So maybe the financial pressure is less. The > Weasleys obviously made a decision to give up Molly's potential > income so that she could be home with the kids. This is a perfectly > valid choice, imo, and one that deserves respect. If things had > gotten much tighter around the Weasley household, though, Molly might > have had to get a job despite her and Arthur's wishes-just like a lot > of families in the RW. > > K Well we have no evidence that they're much better off bow so I'm still surprised she doesn't seem to be working. I understand why she perhaps wouldn't want to work while the kids were young but once they were all at boarding school I think that she would go back to work - or at least do something. With no one to look after for 8 months of the year I hope she's a member of the ww equivalent of the WI or she'd be going insane from boredom. I do understand why she still wouldn't want to work during the holidays - if I had kids like the Twins I'd want to keep at least two eyes on them at all times too. K From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Tue Nov 11 21:54:59 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:54:59 -0000 Subject: Responsability for Sirius's Death In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84675 No previous quote, I'm just catching the ship concerning Responsability for Sirius's Death. It was probably debated before, but IMO, if only dumbledore had told Harry all the truth about the Prophecy, things would propably have been very different. Ignorance takes a huge part in what happened to Sirius, as it takes a huge part in Voldemort's return. It's one of the lessons Harry has to learn from his fifth adventure, and it applies to the whole Wizarding World. Looking back on it, Harry could reproach Dumbledore for hiding him the truth, and the Wizarding World could reproach the Ministry and the Daily Prophet for doing the same. The only difference between Dumbledore and the Ministry is their respective motivation. The Ministry didn't want the WW to know the truth because it would have been dangerous for its own narrow minded conception of power. Dumbledore didn't want Harry to know the truth because he loved him and wanted to protect him. But at the end, the result is quite the same: ignorance only leads to death. Just some thoughts Amicalement, Iris From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Nov 11 22:01:13 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:01:13 -0000 Subject: Why *doesn't* Molly work? In-Reply-To: <000701c3a8d4$3ccff2a0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84676 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" wrote: >> Actually talking of that. If the weasley's are so broke - why hasn't Molly > gone out to work now all her kids are at Hogwarts? I mean with only her and > Arthur in the house during the term time and with magic at her disposal, > exactly what does she *do* during the day? Obviously now she could be doing > OoP stuff, but the order wasn't reformed till after GoF, so that's three > years of very little to do. Jen: A well-earned sabbatical after approximately 30 years of tending to other people's needs? A transition period while she decides what to do career-wise, after said 30-year career as a primary care-giver? I only have one child, but can say that tending to my son's physical/emotional/spiritual needs is more engrossing than *any* full-time job I've held, and literally exhausting when we're going through a developmental growth spurt or other transitions. I shudder to think of 7 kids spread out over 30 years. (Assuming Bill was born in the late 60's). More power to her! I hope for Molly's sake during her three year break she was able to take sparkling bubblebaths, drink champagne and keep her feet up ! From samwise_the_grey at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 22:02:29 2003 From: samwise_the_grey at yahoo.com (samwise_the_grey) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:02:29 -0000 Subject: Medieval Armor in Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84677 Concerning the suits of armor you guys seem to be forgetting one of their more interesting attributes; they are sentient like the paintings. They laugh, they sing, and could possibly fight if given weapons. Perhaps they are not meant for wizards, or decoration, or trophies, but another line of defense put in place by a previous staff. It's a thought... As for Gryffindore's sword... Well, three things come to mind. It could have magical properties we are not aware of. It's a special sword like Excaliber and thus very powerful in battle. Gryffindore was not so seculded from the Muggle world as to not participate in it but had to keep his wizarding abilities a secret. It's not really important why Gryffindore had a sword is it? Maybe Rowling just thought defeating a giant snake with a sword would be more dramatic than a wand. *shug* ~Samwise --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > o_caipora" wrote: > > Coming back to Gryffindor's sword, it may be the only sword we're told about, but there's no shortage of suits of armor. IIRC there's one in the corridor where the Room of Requirement appears, and kids are always hiding behind them or stumbling into them in the dark. The HP lexicon lists quite a few sets, and even a "long gallery full of suits of armor." > > They could be hunting trophies, remembrances of Muggles who attacked wizards. Else they're wizard armor. Armor against magic is bizarre. Amulets, yes. Charms. Voldemort conjures up a magic shield. But not armor. > The suits of armor also seem odd now that you mention it (though the absence of weapons to go with them doesn't, considering that Hogwarts is a school). But what about the portrait of Sir Cadogan? Surely he was a wizard--if not, what is his portrait doing in Hogwarts? Or maybe the paintings, which include one of a group of monks, are enchanted muggle artifacts? Monkhood and wizardry don't seem to go together. The same could apply to the suits of armor: neither wizard armor nor battle trophies, just medieval relics under some sort of animating charm. But that can't be the case for Gryffindor's sword, which seems to be a real weapon. So I'm right back where I started. Unconfuse me, somebody. > Carol From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 22:10:59 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:10:59 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping - Point of Exception In-Reply-To: <000901c3a8a1$20d86740$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84678 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" wrote: > Kathryn: > > I'm all for women following nurturing professions or being stay at > home mums if they want but that was the *only* image that we were > getting and that was wrong, especially I feel in a childrens book. bboy_mn: To this point, I must take exception, and I think it illustrates nicely the point that the original poster was trying to make. JKR is under no obligation to as a writer to construct a well balanced politically correct world. She has no mandate to to make sure all point of view are represented and that no one is offended. She has one and only one mandate, and that is to tell her story as she see it. If we like it, fine; and if we don't, also fine. But an artist of any form has one obligation and objective, and that is to stay true to his/her artistic vision, and political correctness be damned. Book that are constructed with the intent to not offend, create controversy, mirror all currently correct attitudes and beliefs, with out fail are bland, pointless, inane, and trite, and they serve neither to entertain, enlighten, nor inform. House-elves are what they are, and we are certainly free to debate the merits and demerits of the circumstance and fiction reality, but we are in no position to tell the writer what she should or should not have done. Would you demand that they paint a more pleasant smile on the Mona Liza? > Kathryn: > > I don't think JKR did it deliberately I think it just happened but > the book needed some strong female role-models. bboy_mn: Personally, I think that Molly is one of the strongest characters in the book. There are few men or beasts who would not cower in the face of Molly Weasley in a towering rage. There is no question who rules the Weasley 'empire'. She is a fierce, take-charge, no-nonsense person who is unafraid to speak her mind; not to mention a generous, kind, compassionate, and loving person. That doesn't sound like such a bad role model to me. Also, we don't know what Molly does all day long while the kids are away at school. We assume she sits at home all day sipping coffee, eating bon-bons, and listening to the latest witch's soap operas on the Wizard's Wireless. Maybe she works. Maybe she is active in charity or social organizations. Maybe they raise animals on their farm and her job is to tend to them all day. Maybe lots of things, just because we (and Harry) don't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. On a more general note, let's remember that every stereotype is based on a grain of truth, but like all generalizations, they only hold up under the broadest strokes of the brush. All generalization and stereotypes break down when it comes to specifics. Just a thought. bboy_mn From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Tue Nov 11 21:43:55 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 15:43:55 -0600 Subject: Why need more? References: <20031111192140.74496.qmail@web40508.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004501c3a89c$e92b4f00$f1f51d43@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84679 > Why do you think the book need more strong female role-models? > It's not like there isn't any strong female characters at all in the Potterverse, there > are plenty already. Would adding more strong female role-models enhance the story or make > the plot better? Iggy here: I personally agree with this. I think there are some pretty strong female characters in the HP world besides Hermione, and since before OotP. I'd also like to point out that the stories are pretty much told from Harry's perspective so there are a number of things he doesn't see. Like Professor Sprout's encouraging of Neville Longbottom in the Herbology classes and helping to make sure he knows he has talents. She has been noted as telling the impostor Moody that Neville is one of her best students. Professor MacGonagall has been a strong figure since book one, IMHO. She saw Harry's potential and raw talent for being a Seeker and took steps to help him realize it... even in going so far as to make sure he was allowed his own broom in the first year when nobody else was. I'd also like to point out that it was most likely she who bought Harry his Nimbus 2000. She has been a very strict, yet also compassionate and understanding teacher who takes both her duties to the school, and her responsibilities for her students very seriously. Rita Skeeter is an independent and driven woman who reports what she feels is important... albeit skewed for sales of papers. She is a successful woman in her chosen field, and it's been proven that she will stop at nothing to get her story. Like the Marauders, she became an unregistered Animagus, a task which takes talent, dedication, and intelligence. I'd also like to point out that she most likely did this on her own and, unlike the Marauders, didn't have a "study group" to work with, which makes it all the more difficult and dangerous. Petunia Dursley. While you may not like how she treats Harry, she has shown a determined dedication to her family... and I don't only mean Vernon and Dudley. She took in the orphan of the sister she despised, even though she knew she was possibly exposing the rest of her family to magic and some level of dager. Yet she took him in because he is family, he needed her, and she knew how important it was that she did so. I have never seen in the books a single time when she has demanded compensation for her time, effort, and money... not to mention the hassles she's had to deal with both from the consequences of who Harry is, and how her husband and son feel about him. She has still made sure he was taken care of (not in four-star quality, but better than being in an orphanage...) and has even faced down her husband when Harry's protection was on the line. Molly Weasley has taken both Harry and Hermione under her wing, not because Harry was famous or Hermione might be a good match for one of her sons, but because she wanted to. She treated Harry kindly and with respect before she even realized who he was, and accepted him and Hermione as though they were her own children because she truly cares about them. She is honest, forthright, and is concerned for the welfare of the entire Trio, not just her son. She is a truly talented homemaker, confectionist, and cook. While we might not see her have any other jobs, for all we know she spends some time selling the WW version of Mary Kay, Avon, or Tupperware. Even if she doesn't, that shouldn't matter... she's done a wonderful job raising seven kids, as well as doing what she can to help in the upbringing of Harry and Hermione. Molly works hard for her family, and for the OotP... even if she doesn't have a "day job," I don't see where that would make her any less strong or important. >Joan: > Also, do you think if some of the existed characters in potterverse were written as > females, such as Lupin (I pick him because a majority of readers consider him as a > positive, nice, strong and perfect person), do you think the HP series will suddenly > become a better book just because Lupin was a female? Or how about Dumbledore? May be if > Dumbledore was a female than no one would complaint because he's afterall one of the > strongest (power and position-wise) person in the potterverse. Do you think the HP seires > will be much better with Dumbledore being a female than? Iggy here: I agree with your point here. No character should have to be a specific gender in order to make the books better. Nor does there need to be an equal "boy / girl" ratio to make the books strong. Dumbledore is a grandfather figure, MacGonagall a grandmother one. Molly is mother figure in the books, while Arthur is a good father figure. The other adults have their places, as does every child. One of the reasons you're also more likely to see more boys being prominent int he books is because, again, things are seen through Harry's eyes... and boys tend to associate more with boys. (Also, a number of things take place in the boy's dorms... If things were written from Hermione's view, you'd see a lot more girls in prominence.) The gender of a person in a book, ultimately, should not matter in whether or not you can identify with them. Assuming so and especially trying to convince others that this is the case, is only perpetuating a sexist attitude that the person is supposedly trying top eliminate. What they're ultimately saying is that sexism shouldn't exist, but girls should only identify with girls, boys should only identify with boys, and neither is allowed to see a member of the other gender as a solid role-model. (Personally, most of my role-models have been men, yes, but there are also a great many females out there I admire greatly as well... aside from my mom. To name a few, we have Whoppi Goldberg, Hellen Keller, Nichelle Nichols, and Polgara the Sorceress... Yes, I know that the last one is a literary character, but that doesn't take away from her admirable qualities, IMHO.) > Joan: > So if Molly was written as a working mom, earning as much money, if not more, than > Arthur. Does that make the book suddenly all better? What can the fact Molly being a > working mom bring into the story? How can the fact she, a working professional, offer > more what Harry needs than what she has been already offering in the series right now: > motherly love? It really makes no difference to me, working or not working. Iggy here: Actually, IMHO, having Molly be a working mom would take away from her as a character. She is designed to be, among other things, a contrast to Petunia as a caring and accepting housewife/mom. (Which brings up the question of why nobody had griped that Petunia is a housewife without a job as well...) While having her work would not make her less caring, I think it would definitely take away from this contrast aspect. I also feel that Harry *needs* to see what a loving and caring "stay-at-home mom" is like, since his was taken from him... he needs to have an opportunity to experience this, especially with what he has gone through and will go through. If you really think about it, the Weasley family, as they are right now, provide Harry with more stable a foundation in his life than Hogwarts can. > Joan: > Being a female reader myself, I can never understand all these complaints and criticism > about the need of more strong female role-models. (Hello? Hermione? McGonagal? don't they > exist? What more do you need? there are already almost too many characters in the > Potterverse already and many don't to get to be developed) I'm just curious why do you > think there's such a "need". Do you think it's giving wrong messages to little girls or > something? If you think so than can you cite evidence of how little girls won't grow up > as strong female just because they read HP? or is it more of a personal thing that you > feel you can't related to any of the character because none of the female character are > like you, even if you do find a character you feel related to they're males, so that > doesn't count? For me, that is never a issue as I don't care what the gender these > characters are, I can identify with any character regardless what his/her gender is. Iggy here: See my earlier comments in this letter regarding the idea of re-writing some characters as a different gender. I'd also like to point out something interesting: JKR is a *female* author who's writing books about Harry Potter.... books that are from a *male* perspective. This is very difficult to do, and she is doing an admirable job at it. One of the only other authors I have ever read the works of that I feel this strongly about how good of a job they do at this is Judy Blume. No male author can completely understand a female's perspective, just as no female can truly understand a male's perspective. JKR has taken on this incredibly difficult writing task, and has done so quite well so far. If she feels that she's writing her book as it should be written, and from the perspective of the main character, then it's her decision. If you enjoy her books for it, then great. If you feel that she's writing the stories all wrong and you could do the job better, I suggest you try reading some other authors who have attempted her task and failed... and then I challenge you to try writing a set of books like this and doing a better job of it. (And remember, you will be required to write from a cross-gender perspective, include views, characters, and actions that can in no way be considered sexist or prejudiced, write well enough to gain legions of fans, inspire a series of movies, and do everything else she does without inspiring any of the controversy... I think that's the only way any of her serious critics will get a series of books that they feel are better, and less offensive, than hers.) Just to be nice, I'll give you 30 years to do it... By that time, you should at least have 5 of the books written to everyone's satisfaction... Iggy McSnurd (the MLTA) From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 22:01:26 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:01:26 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84680 > Joe: I seem to remember that in OOP Harry was thinking about Ron and > it said that "The truth was that Ron had just reminded Harry forcibly > of another Gryffindor Quidditch player who had once sat rumpling his > hair under this very tree". > > Of course, the other Gryffindor Quidditch player that Ron is > reminding harry of was James. Harry saw James rumpling his hair > under the tree in Snape's pensive. I think that this is pretty solid > evidence that James was in Gryffindor or else JKR would have just > wrote that Ron reminded Harry of another Quidditch player, not > necessarily another Gryffindor Quidditch player. > > Thanks-Joe Now me: The quote above illustrates that Harry *thought* James was in Gryffindor. It doesn't necessarily make it true. How many hundreds of witches and wizards thought Sirius murdered 13 people with one curse? Just because they believed it didn't make that true. Now I must quote an earlier post by me: "I don't necessarily think Harry would know. He may have assumed, but there is no canon to say he knows for sure. In COS (sorry, don't have my book) he thinks he could perhaps be the heir of Slytherin, he admits not know anything about his father or his family. But then, he doesn't do anything to find out--doesn't ask questions, doesn't surf the internet for his family tree:) *Why* won't Harry ask these questions?! I for one would really like the answers. I believe it's *possible* JKR is leading us to believe James was in Gryffindor, when he may not have been. If he was in fact in Gryffindor, wouldn't she just come out and say it? Why does all the evidence skirt around the subject?" I hate to argue (well, that's not true, I love it), but I am firmly in the camp that JKR is purposly misleading us into believing James was in Gryffindor only to reveal in book 6 or 7 that he was not. The only person who will be able to change my mind on this is JKR herself. -Hermowninny From przepla at ipartner.com.pl Tue Nov 11 22:27:16 2003 From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 23:27:16 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: uniforms In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FB16244.4030007@ipartner.com.pl> No: HPFGUIDX 84681 Dennis wrote: > >To the point, this passage can't tell us anything about uniform >standards, as we see this girl was clearly marked, even if no one >else is. Perhaps prefect badges don't mark a person's house, even, >but surely the fact that it was a prefect would have let them >recognize what house she came from. I mean, prefects are students >you'd pay enough attention to to know their house, right? > > > In the matter of fact we know that prefect badges mark a person's house. OotP states: "A large P was superimposed on the Gryffindor lion." (chapter 9) So we must assume that Ravenclaws prefects have badges with P superimposed on eagle. -- Przemyslaw 'Pshemekan' Plaskowicki Those who dream by day are cognizant of many things which escape those who dream only by night. (Edgar Allan Poe, "Eleonora") From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 11 22:32:26 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:32:26 -0000 Subject: Why *doesn't* Molly work? In-Reply-To: <22.3f574eb7.2ce2a20b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84682 Tonks wrote: > In GoF, she is one of the first asked for her help by DD. I don't > think this is a coincidence. I think that Molly hasn't shown us > what she can do yet. I agree with this. We've got nothing, really, to go on yet--other than DD's asking her right off--but I know I came away from OoP feeling very different about Molly than many other HPfGU members apparently do. I felt a strength & purpose in her that I didn't know were there before. Maybe I'm reading too much into things, but I also think Molly will be showing us something really POWERFUL before this is all over. Siriusly Snapey Susan From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 06:43:19 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:43:19 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping - Point of Exception References: Message-ID: <000b01c3a8e8$4a7645d0$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84683 > > bboy_mn: > > To this point, I must take exception, and I think it illustrates > nicely the point that the original poster was trying to make. > > JKR is under no obligation to as a writer to construct a well balanced > politically correct world. She has no mandate to to make sure all > point of view are represented and that no one is offended. > K - OK several people seem to think that by a strong character I mean someone who is powerful I don't I mean a character that is well-developed enough to stand on its own. I already explained this earlier in the thread but several people seem to have skipped that response and are misunderstanding me. Neville is a strong character because I feel I know him. Dean isn't because I know a few superficial facts about him but nothing about his personality. Hermione is a strong character. before OoP I couldn't put any other female in that category. Personally I would think that as an author writing foar an audience of both genders JKR would want to have some more female characters. I know I used to hate reading books where the boys got all the fun. I'm not saying that she should make sure she has equal numbers of characters of each gender - I simply wonder why it is that *all* the female characters other than Hermione are 2d pre-OoP. I am not saying that JKR shouldn't write what she wants I am just saying that it strikes *me" as wrong to make the characters so lopsided in terms of which gender they are. My other point is about the ww not JKR. Up until OoP it seemed that the ww was sexist (I'm not saying that JKR shouldn't write it this way, just making an observation about the way it seemed). Until OoP we only saw women as mothers, teachers or barmaids. Oh and a dressmaker - all very stereotypical women's professions. I wanted someone to do something about it - not JKR, but someone in the ww - it seemed to me that poor Hermione had better want to teach or marry and breed because otherwise she was going to be stuck for options. Both these 'problems' were resolved in OoP. Characterwise Molly, Minerva and Ginny were fleshed out, we got two female villains, and two new female characters were introduced and we learnt a lot about them. And as regards the ww we saw women in positions of responsibility and power proving that the ww isn't as sexist as it had appeared we just hadn't seen these women before even though they existed. bboy_mn > > Book that are constructed with the intent to not offend, create > controversy, mirror all currently correct attitudes and beliefs, with > out fail are bland, pointless, inane, and trite, and they serve > neither to entertain, enlighten, nor inform. > K I don't want her to mirror anyone's beliefs or try and write a politically correct society. I just want(ed) more female characters, or a reason why we only got to have strong male characters. > > > Kathryn: > > > > I don't think JKR did it deliberately I think it just happened but > > the book needed some strong female role-models. > > bboy_mn: > > Personally, I think that Molly is one of the strongest characters in > the book. There are few men or beasts who would not cower in the face > of Molly Weasley in a towering rage. There is no question who rules > the Weasley 'empire'. She is a fierce, take-charge, no-nonsense person > who is unafraid to speak her mind; not to mention a generous, kind, > compassionate, and loving person. That doesn't sound like such a bad > role model to me. > K But before OoP all we knew was that she was a motherly woman with a sharp tongue. That's *it*. That's not a strong character it's a 2d stereotype of a mother of a large family. bboy_mn > Also, we don't know what Molly does all day long while the kids are > away at school. We assume she sits at home all day sipping coffee, > eating bon-bons, and listening to the latest witch's soap operas on > the Wizard's Wireless. Maybe she works. Maybe she is active in charity > or social organizations. Maybe they raise animals on their farm and > her job is to tend to them all day. Maybe lots of things, just because > we (and Harry) don't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. > K And that's my point. We knew *nothing* about her, she was background noise, nothing else. I don't particularly want to know what she does all day (my comments on another thread aside), I want to know something about *her* as a person. I want to know something more about the women than their role in life - I want to know them. Consequently I was delighted when we got to know her better in OoP. I loved the development of Ginny beyond the role of 'little sister' into an actual person. I adored Minerva's interactions with Umbridge because they told us things about both women. I also loved the development of the Twins beyond their 2d role as 'practical jokers' into actual people that I liked (although that really started earlier in the series). Honestly before OoP I knew more about *Percy* than any of the women (do I really need to keep typing, apart from Hermione, you all know I mean that by now, right?) and several people have complained about his 2dness. K From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 06:47:49 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:47:49 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why *doesn't* Molly work? References: Message-ID: <001f01c3a8e8$ec46d550$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84684 Siriusly Snapey Susan We've got nothing, really, to go on yet--other > than DD's asking her right off--but I know I came away from OoP > feeling very different about Molly than many other HPfGU members > apparently do. I felt a strength & purpose in her that I didn't > know were there before. Maybe I'm reading too much into things, but > I also think Molly will be showing us something really POWERFUL > before this is all over. > > > K Oh I agree completely. I think she's probably a pretty powerful witch (and failing that she could just give Voldemort a piece of her mind, after raising those kids I'm sure she could cow one megalomaniac ) I really wanted to know more about her after the end of GoF and loved the scenes with her in OoP - even if I did want to shake some sense into her at some points. I always suspected that at some point JKR was going to move her beyond the 2d role that she had occupied in the early books - and now we've seen the beginnings of that. Same as I always wanted Minerva to show us what she was made of - and she did. That woman truly rocks. :) K From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Tue Nov 11 22:54:41 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:54:41 -0000 Subject: uniforms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84685 Yolanda wrote: They don't wear house specific markings. Remember in CoS when Harry and Ron disguised as Slytherins asked a girl where the Slytherin common room was and she said she was in Ravenclaw. They never could have mistaken a student from one house for another if they wore markings. They wouldn't have had to guess who was a Slytherin in the first place. House markings would have solved that problem easily. sachmet96 wrote: I just reread the passage and she sounded to me that she thought they were stupid to even assume she was Slytherin which implies to me that it must have been obvious she was a Ravenclaw. ARYA NOW: Actually, it could also just be that she took offense at being mistaken as a Slytherin. (*gasp*!!! what an awful thing to accuse someone to be!!!) Not to mention the fact that she might have been offended that other students didn't know the name of a Prefect. (Maybe she and PErcy bonded because of mutual bigheadedness. Hmmm, I wonder if Perce is still seeing that muggleborn...) sachmet96 wrote: I still think there are markings on the robes true it isn't said in the books that there are markings but it also isn't said that there aren't. As it never says plain robes, except in the Hogwart letters and that means that the markings are attached later (after the sorting). ARYA NOW: It could be true-- I do think it would fit more with the whole British school theme if they wore their colors. Plus, that would make them seem not just stupid for treating Penelope as a Slytherin because not only would she be clearly marked as a Ravenclaw, but they would have been wearing Slytherin robes then in their roles of impersonating C&G. They would have to be extremely thick to not knwo someone in their own house. Then again, they were trying to fake being C&G, so it probably just fit the bill to be thick, if this was the case. sachmet96 wrote: Also I find it hard to believe that Harry and friend could recognise students from different houses (like pointed out in previous posts), like a group of Slytherins, even when they are eating with them nearly every day. ARYA NOW: I do tend to agree with you about the robes having *some* distinguishing feature to denote House. However, just to play the argumentative advocate, your above point may be explained by Harry recognizing groups of students via association. For example, he sees Malfoy and a group following and all laughing at Malfoy jokes, then that group is a "group of Slytherins". Or he sees some Hufflepuff (he knows them because they had Herbology together) and sees a group with let's say Justin Finch-Fletchly and Ernie Macmillan who are all associating and that is a "group of Hufflepuffs". It seems to me that since the Sorting Hat groups people according to personality and skills that "grouping" (perhaps "stereotyping??) is just a very natural thing to do to file away the people you meet. ('This is Padma and she's a Ravenclaw' then means 'This is Padma and she studies hard and likes to excel academically'.) sachmet96 wrote: And how are professors to distinguish first year students to deduct/award points. I can't believe they have such a good memory to recognise every single first year student after only a few days to do that. And what about teachers who don't teach all students (like the ones from the elective classes?) are they going to ask what house the student is in and then deduct points? I find that hard to believe and it would be easy for the student to lie wouldn't it? ARYA NOW: The only classes that we seem to have any canon evidence for the classes being mixed together is for Potions with the Slytherins and Herbology with the Hufflepuffs. It hasn't ever been mentioned for any other classes and it could be possible the classes are almost all one house per class. Or it could be that the classes are segregated-- Slytherins all up front and on the right, Gryffindors on the left, Hufflepuffs, in the back, behind the Slytherins and Ravenclaws, fall in into the last quadrant of the room. Afterall, except for Herbology or Potions, we never hear Harry describe what any student other than a Gryffindor says or does in class. sachmet96 wrote: In my school we had over 1000 students and about 90 teachers and esp. when I was in a higher class I wasn't able to distinguis the lower class students anymore (I simply didn't pay any attention to them) and same goes for students of different classes in the same year. I knew they were in my year but I couldn't name which class. My primary school was a half boarding school so all students had meals together and there were only about 200 students and I could also not say in which class who was (neither could the teachers btw.). So from personal experience I would say that there must be a distinguishing feature on which the teachers can recognise the house the student is in simply to deduct/award points. ARYA NOW: We only really hear of Snape and McGonagall deducting points in a hallway setting. Both are very well aware to what House Harry belongs. So how would Snape take points away from some indistinguishable student? Well, since the hourglasses of House Points (with the jewels) seems to automatically respond to a professor saying "Fifty points from Gryffindor" then I think it may also be able to respond to "Ten points from your house for running in the hall". sachmet96 wrote: So that's why I believe there are some markings on the uniforms. ARYA NOW: Well, I tried to be a good debater and add some counterpoints to this to try to figure it out and I think I've done well. However, I still tend to agree with you. I think it just fits more with the "theme" and "feel" of the school. Maybe we should add the topic of uniforms and house signia on uniforms to the thread with questions for JKR. Arya From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Tue Nov 11 22:58:50 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:58:50 -0000 Subject: uniforms In-Reply-To: <3FB16244.4030007@ipartner.com.pl> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84686 > Dennis wrote: > >To the point, this passage can't tell us anything about uniform > >standards, as we see this girl was clearly marked, even if no one > >else is. Perhaps prefect badges don't mark a person's house, > >even,but surely the fact that it was a prefect would have let them > >recognize what house she came from. I mean, prefects are students > >you'd pay enough attention to to know their house, right? > > > > Przemyslaw 'Pshemekan' Plaskowicki wrote: In the matter of fact we know that prefect badges mark a person's house. OotP states: "A large P was superimposed on the Gryffindor lion." (chapter 9) So we must assume that Ravenclaws prefects have badges with P superimposed on eagle. > ARYA NOW: But this badge that Ron gets is different from the shinny silver badge that PErcy had back in his 5th year (and that Penelope might have had then, too). No mention of it being red with a lion or anything. It's possible the badges changed a bit. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 21:55:39 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:55:39 -0000 Subject: Tur-bans or Too-Much (was Re: Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84687 >I said: > > To begin with, I want to know what she [Rowling] meant by saying (in answer to > > why she made Quirrell rather than Snape the villain in SS/PS), "I > > know all about Snape and he'd never put on a turban." (Huh? Does > > that mean he'd never let another person manipulate his will by > > getting literally or figuratively inside his head? If not, what the > > heck does it mean?) > Mschelle in Au said: > Well, the psychological implications of Quirrel's choice of headwear > are interesting, especially given turbans were popular with the > more 'mystical' set circa 19th century (AFAIK) such as mediums, and I > do wonder if JKR had that in mind when devising the character of > Quirrel who was a link (a medium if you will) between LV and life and > death. > > However, I think JKR's comment above was more a general humorous > observation about Snape's aesthetic sensibilities in that Snape would > most likely think a turban (a) served no useful function and (b) was > self-indulgent posturing (harkening back to their use by mystics > within a western context and not a comment on those cultures where > such headwear has a different meaning). Well, okay. But my point is that "Snape wouldn't wear a turban" is a strange response to "Why did you make Quirrell the villain (in SS/PS) instead of Snape?" I think she wanted to get around the question so we wouldn't know whether Snape is a villain or not (he's clearly not THE villain in SS or any of the five books we've read so far, but he's still very mysterious and she seems to want it that way). But aside from personal tastes in clothing (haberdashery), what does "Snape wouldn't wear a turban" really mean? That Snape wouldn't allow someone/something inside his head that necessitated the wearing of a turban? I understand why she wouldn't just come out and say "because Snape isn't a villain," but why not just say, "I needed an expendable villain who won't reenter the story. Snape is a key character who can't be eliminated from the plot"? The turban has nothing to do with the question as far as I can see. Carol, who thinks Rowling's answer was very Snapey (mysterious and elusive) From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 22:04:26 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:04:26 -0000 Subject: Hagrid Apparated? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84688 > psychobirdgirl: > > So that implies then that Hagrid is extra skilled at apparation, > even though it is illegal for him to perform magic and he was never > very good at it anyway. This leads me to the conclusion that > Dumbledore made him disappear; further conclusion, Dumbledore has a > way of watching people from afar and using his magic on them. > Now me: Forgive me for not knowing, but when did Hagrid apparate? -Hermowninny From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 22:05:41 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:05:41 -0000 Subject: Ogg the Gamekeeper In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84689 > ___nkittyhawk, who doesn't believe in flints, wrote: > > Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Hagrid said he got the > > Gamekeeper job after he was kicked out of Hogwarts (maybe right > > after, a year after - that sort of time frame) > > Well, I though it a bit strange that Mrs. Weasley at the end of GoF > > was reminiscing about the gamekeeper that came before Hagrid (Ogg). > > Wouldn't that mean she (and, of course, Arthur) were at school with > > Tom Riddle, Hagrid and Myrtle, or even *before* them? > > ayers185 said: > It is quite impossible, in my opinion, to assume that Hagrid just one > day took over the job, leaving his predecessor out of a job. What > makes more sense is that Hagrid was apprenticed to Ogg until such > time as he was ready to take o'er the job himself. > > Not to mention that Mrs. Weasley would have to be older than Hagrid, who is in his sixties, if she was already out of school when he became gamekeeper at thirteen, which seems to me extremely unlikely. My guess, based on the approximate ages of their older sons, is that Mr. and Mrs. Weasley are in their mid-forties to early fifties. I can't imagine Mrs. Weasley waiting till she was in her late thirties or early forties to get married. But unfortunately, there's no solid evidence one way or another. Or, I should say, none that I'm aware of. I do believe in flints, BTW, and this may well be one. But if so, why bring Ogg up at all? Carol From thren at subreality.com Tue Nov 11 22:28:15 2003 From: thren at subreality.com (Thren) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 17:28:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Of course Snape is a Slytherin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FB1627F.3090102@subreality.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84690 Carol said: > I don't think we have any >indication that Snape is not a "pure blood." He wouldn't have called >Lily a "mud blood" if his own heritage were questionable. > And Thren says: You are correct that we have no evidence that he's not a pureblood, but neither do we have any evidence that he *is*. One could make a case for him using the term in a 'I might be low on the food chain, but still higher than you' kind of way. It would show any Slytherins (or anyone, really) that he had distanced himself from the more undesirable bits of his parentage and had embraced the Slytherin ideal even if he didn't couldn't actual live up to it. I have my suspicions about him being a half-blood, though I'm not sure how likely that is. He seems to be in pretty thick with Malfoy Senior, and he doesn't seem to be the kind of person to hobnob with anything less than purebloods if he can help it. On the other hand, I've always gotten a vibe off their relationship, like Snape was somehow not quite equal to Lucius (even without the 'Malfoy is better than everyone' mentality). Perhaps his parentage is 'forgiven', but not forgotten? Now I'm just thinking out loud. :) Either way, it'll be interesting to see what JKR has to say on the subject (and she'd better do at some point, or I'll be miffed). Thren From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 22:35:20 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:35:20 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84691 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "psychobirdgirl" wrote: > > Notice the "naturally." She states elsewhere that Hagrid was in > > Gryffindor, also with a "naturally." Gryffindor is her favorite > house > > > > Carol > > psychobirdgirl(me): > > I thought that Hagrid was a Hufflepuff? > > psychobirdgirl The statement that Hagrid was in Gryffindor is in the Oct. 20, 2000, chat transcript: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/1000-livechat-barnesnoble.html From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 22:12:51 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:12:51 -0000 Subject: Questions to ponder In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84692 > > Kimberley asked: how did Hermione or other muggle born wizards know > or learn about Hogwarts > > and how do they convince their parents to let them go to school > there? I mean, if muggles do > > not know about the magical world, why would they so willingly send > their children to a wizard > > school vs regular school? > > psychobirdgirl said: > > I think that maybe they get an extra letter and maybe a visit from > someone like McG or Dumbledore. I think they > make visits earlier in the summer Which brings up another question we could ask Rowling without spoiling the plot: Do Hogwarts teachers stay at the school during the summer? And what do they do when the students are gone? (You can spend only so much time making lesson plans and rereading the textbooks, especially if you've been teaching the same subject for fourteen years or more. My apologies if this question has been asked and answered before. Carol From cubs9911 at aol.com Tue Nov 11 22:40:44 2003 From: cubs9911 at aol.com (cubs99111) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:40:44 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84693 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermowninny719" wrote: > > Joe: I seem to remember that in OOP Harry was thinking about Ron > and > > it said that "The truth was that Ron had just reminded Harry > forcibly > > of another Gryffindor Quidditch player who had once sat rumpling > his > > hair under this very tree". > > > > Of course, the other Gryffindor Quidditch player that Ron is > > reminding harry of was James. Harry saw James rumpling his hair > > under the tree in Snape's pensive. I think that this is pretty > solid > > evidence that James was in Gryffindor or else JKR would have just > > wrote that Ron reminded Harry of another Quidditch player, not > > necessarily another Gryffindor Quidditch player. > > > > Thanks-Joe > > Now me: > The quote above illustrates that Harry *thought* James was in > Gryffindor. It doesn't necessarily make it true. > > How many hundreds of witches and wizards thought Sirius murdered 13 > people with one curse? Just because they believed it didn't make > that true. > >Joe: I find in really hard to believe that Harry would never have asked anyone what house his parents were in in the last 5 years. I would think that common sense would tell us that if Harry refers to his father as a Gryffindor then it is most likely true. Also, Isn't James' middle name Godrick or is that just something that I picked up in fan fictions. I'm not sure if it has ever been mentioned in canon or interviews? -Joe From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 22:45:52 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:45:52 -0000 Subject: Responsability for Sirius's Death In-Reply-To: <20031111094232.86869.qmail@web25104.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84694 udder_pen_dragon wrote: > I read a lot about who is believed to be responsible for Sirisus dieing. Of course the blame is shared is shared, I have compiled a list of the usual suspects and some mabee not so usual. I have put them in what I believe to be ranking order. > 4) Sevrus Snape : for IMO not even attempting to teach Harry Occlumency. If you want to teach a 15 year old, to play Tennis you don't hire Rudedski and Phillipousis (excuse the spelling for bot of those) to serve aces at him in the hope that he might learn something. > I don't blame Harry at all. He is only 15and there are adults(?) around him who are supposed to protect him and not, as in the case of Snape, to use him as a target for their own spite. > > Udder Pendragon On the contrary, Snape saved Harry's life (and those of his friends) by summoning the Order to go after him. As for not trying to teach Harry occlumency, he did try. It was Harry who refused to shut off his own feelings at night to prevent the dream from coming. (He wanted it to come.) Also, of course, he didn't fully trust Snape. Once Harry had seen Snape's memories, Snape could no longer bring himself to continue teaching Harry, but he did at least tell Dumbledore what had happened. At that point, Dumbledore should probably have continued the lessons himself, or at least explained to Harry why he couldn't look him in the eye and why he needed the lessons. I'm not blaming Dumbledore, I'm just arguing that Snape was not using Harry as a target for his spite. He was doing his best to teach him a valuable skill. Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 11 22:50:17 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:50:17 -0000 Subject: Harry's role (Was:Re: crowns and the Alchymical Wedding) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84695 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: > Hans: > > > > > > > A few > > > months ago there was a big debate in this group about whether Harry > > Potter > > > is everyman or Christ. I say he is both! > > > > > > Geoff: > > I feel that I can only disagree with your view on Harry Potter. He > > cannot be an everyman or Christ. No person can be a Christ figure > > except Christ himself, God in human form. We can be Christ-like; we > > are enjoined to imitate Christ ? read Philippians 2 for example. > Geoff: > I can't actually be quite sure what either of you mean here unless you > define your terms more exactly. For instance, one could debate > whether C.S. Lewis' Aslan is Christ or a Christ figure (Geoff > apparently seeing these as the same thing?), or whether Harry is an > allegorical figure of Christ or just a normal person like any of us > (aside from being fictional) deposited into special circumstances. > Geoff: In the Narnia books, once we leave our own time, we are seeing a different universe or world. In it, CS Lewis is using allegory to tell the story of Christ, his death and resurrection (and in "The Last Battle" his gift of salvation), in this universe where God comes in a different form - the form of Aslan, whom it is made clear is the Son of the Great Emperor. Harry is not an allegorical figure of Christ. we are not in a parallel universe but in a world which directly interacts with our own and with folk who move in both. Annemehr: > I had always looked at Harry as a normal person, and at his story as > what one might do given that magic is real (and given that an Evil > Overlord has marked one for death). But the prophecy seems to change > his role completely. If it is to be believed, Harry is the *one* who > can save many people (not all mankind) from terror and death (not > eternal misery). He is not Christ, but no longer quite everyman, > either -- or at least that's the feeling I got by the end of the book. > There is now a disconnect between him and the rest of us. Geoff: For that reason, Harry reminds me a little of John the Baptist who was marked for a special purpose, to warn of the coming of Christ and who would save many people by convincing them opf the need to change their life. His life style created a disconnect between him and other people. Annemehr: > Not only > that, but there is the implication that he must do his saving by > killing, which idea he likes no better than being killed, and which is > nothing like what Christ had to do. > Geoff: Quite. You cannot necessarily make an allegory or an ordinary story totally fit something like the basis tenets of Christianity. You can draw parallels. Tolkien does the same with the interaction between Melkor/Morgoth (the fallen angel) and the angelic beings who remain faithful to Eru. My point was that you cannot make Harry be the teacher and the disciple at one and the same time. And, as I said before, I believe that there is only one Christ figure; Harry, like many folk in the real world, can be seen as Christ-like which is a different kettle of fish. From przepla at ipartner.com.pl Tue Nov 11 23:21:14 2003 From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:21:14 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: uniforms In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FB16EEA.4000501@ipartner.com.pl> No: HPFGUIDX 84696 >> Dennis wrote: >>>To the point, this passage can't tell us anything about uniform >>>standards, as we see this girl was clearly marked, even if no one >>>else is. Perhaps prefect badges don't mark a person's house, >>>even,but surely the fact that it was a prefect would have let them >>>recognize what house she came from. I mean, prefects are students >>>you'd pay enough attention to to know their house, right? >>> >>> >>> >>> >Przemyslaw 'Pshemekan' Plaskowicki wrote: > >In the matter of fact we know that prefect badges mark a person's >house. OotP states: "A large P was superimposed on the Gryffindor >lion." (chapter 9) So we must assume that Ravenclaws prefects have >badges with P superimposed on eagle. > > > >ARYA NOW: >But this badge that Ron gets is different from the shinny silver >badge that PErcy had back in his 5th year (and that Penelope might >have had then, too). No mention of it being red with a lion or >anything. It's possible the badges changed a bit. > > > Not quite. The next sentence in OotP is: "He had seen a badge just like this on Percy's chest on his very first day at Hogwarts." But, of course, this is a flint since in earlier in OotP badge is described as: "scarlet and gold" while is PS/SS it is: "shiny silver badge (...) with the letter P on it" -- Przemyslaw 'Pshemekan' Plaskowicki It is unwise to be too sure of one's own wisdom. It is healthy to be reminded that the strongest might weaken and the wisest might err. (Mahatma Gandhi) From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 07:27:21 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 23:27:21 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hagrid Apparated? References: Message-ID: <001d01c3a8ee$697f7770$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84697 > > psychobirdgirl: > > > > So that implies then that Hagrid is extra skilled at apparation, > > even though it is illegal for him to perform magic and he was never > > very good at it anyway. This leads me to the conclusion that > > Dumbledore made him disappear; further conclusion, Dumbledore has a > > way of watching people from afar and using his magic on them. > > > > -Hermowninny > Now me: > Forgive me for not knowing, but when did Hagrid apparate? > Well I don't know if this is what she meant but at the beginning of PS he seems to arrive at the rocky island the Dursleys are hiding on without a boat (at least he uses theirs to leave). K From silmariel at telefonica.net Wed Nov 12 00:36:40 2003 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 01:36:40 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] asking the question In-Reply-To: <001f01c3a885$32d459c0$84e66151@f3b7j4> References: <1068503076.20497.11029.m17@yahoogroups.com> <001f01c3a885$32d459c0$84e66151@f3b7j4> Message-ID: <200311120136.40743.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 84698 > bboy_mn wondered: > > One is, what would you like to ask that she is likely to > > answer, and the other is what would you personally really like > > to know. > > What is you public question for JKR? Will we hear more about the Transilvania Triangle? The Transilvania Triangle: featuring Karkarov, Charlie Weasley, Victor Krum writing Hermione Granger, and the Vampires, with our guest stars Vapormort and the deceased professor Quirrel. > > What is your private question for JKR? Given DD's statement, refering to Snape's hate of James, that he as an old man didn't remember that some scars run too deep to be healed, what is Snape's scar? Note: to me the answer is not the Prank because I think it does not justify that intensity of hate when your enemy has been dead 14 years. To me, that's not a 'scar not to be healed', it is a scar you can heal or not, but depending on the person, not something so deep that it is Ever So Present after 14 years. Silmariel From sylviablundell at aol.com Tue Nov 11 23:27:05 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 23:27:05 -0000 Subject: Chapter discussion - Chapter Five Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84699 Abigail wrote: >His (Sirius') stay in Grimmauld Place where he was a sullen and unhappy teenager regresses Sirius back to that same sullen and unhappy person, which is why he's so much more mature in GoF than Oop. Of course you're right, Abigail. Sirius probably spent hours shut up in his room during his mother's reign and here he is back again. A tendency to stay in one's room incommunicado for hours is typical teenage behaviour, even in normal families. Poor Sirius must have felt he was entering some kind of time-loop, locked in his room with his mother still shouting downstairs. No wonder he regresses Sylvia. On another point: Meri wrote: >Molly also seems to have a short fuse when it comes to her kids >sassing her, like in the scene in Gof, when she buys Ron his dress >robes and he says he wont wear them. Molly gets posiviely snippy >and irritated with him; So should I have done, when you think what sacrifices she must have made to buy the damn things. Dont think I'm not sympathetic with Ron. It must have been agony to contemplate wearing those robes in public, but I sympathise with Molly too. Sylvia . From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 11 23:33:04 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 23:33:04 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping - Point of Exception In-Reply-To: <000b01c3a8e8$4a7645d0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84700 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" wrote: Until OoP we only saw women as >>> mothers, teachers or barmaids. Oh and a dressmaker - all very stereotypical women's professions. I wanted someone to do something about it - not JKR, but someone in the ww - it seemed to me that poor Hermione had better want to teach or marry and breed because otherwise she was going to be stuck for options.<<< Ah, you fell for some of JKR's little tricks. Madam Rosmerta is not just a barmaid. She owns the Three Broomsticks: "scared away all my customers" she complains to Fudge with an edge in her voice. -PoA ch. 10 At least two of the QWC Irish Chasers whom Harry regards as "superb" are female also, though you have to keep a close eye on the pronouns to spot them. JKR is subtly playing on her readers' own sexist assumptions: a flashily dressed woman in a bar can't be the owner; star athletes are male. I think as readers we want JKR to hold up a Mirror of Erised to our own desires. We wish we could be part of the wizarding world and want to see the things we identify with in the characters. I admit I felt a touch of ethnic pride when "Anthony Goldstein" became a Ravenclaw prefect. But the books aren't about Jewish identity and they aren't, so far, about female identity either. They are very much about Harry discovering what it means to be a man. Harry tends to notice men more than women. He isn't interested in women's lives yet; certainly he doesn't think much about how their lives are different than his because they're women. Pippin From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 07:45:41 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 23:45:41 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping - Point of Exception References: Message-ID: <003301c3a8f0$fa3dfe10$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84701 Pippin > > Ah, you fell for some of JKR's little tricks. Madam Rosmerta > is not just a barmaid. She owns the Three Broomsticks: "scared > away all my customers" she complains to Fudge with an edge in > her voice. -PoA ch. 10 > > At least two of the QWC Irish Chasers whom Harry regards as > "superb" are female also, though you have to keep a close eye > on the pronouns to spot them. JKR is subtly playing on her > readers' own sexist assumptions: a flashily dressed woman in a > bar can't be the owner; star athletes are male. > > K Well actually I knew both of those. Landlady is anothern sterotypical female profession though - in fact alewives have been common since the middle ages ... uh sorry I did an essay on sports and pasttimes in Medieval London for my masters, I'm going to stop there before I veer too much ot. And I did spot the women quidditch players, in fact one of the professional teams is all female. But as far as I could see (before OoP) women did not occupy positions of power or influence in the ww - happily I was wrong, we just hadn't seen any. I have no problem with JKR writing the ww as being sexist or being a perfect meritocracy (obviously it isn't *cough*Fudge*cough*). I was simply making an observation about what we had seen. My complaint was in the lack of well-developed female characters. K From tammy at mauswerks.net Tue Nov 11 23:57:53 2003 From: tammy at mauswerks.net (Tammy Rizzo) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:57:53 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Tur-bans or Too-Much (was Re: Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FB13131.26206.FD5E8F@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 84702 On 11 Nov 2003 at 21:55, justcarol67 wrote: Someone, but I *THINK* it was justcarol67, said: > To begin with, I want to know what she [Rowling] meant by saying > (in answer to why she made Quirrell rather than Snape the villain in > SS/PS), "I know all about Snape and he'd never put on a turban." > (Huh? Does that mean he'd never let another person manipulate his > will by getting literally or figuratively inside his head? If not, what > the heck does it mean?) Now me (Tammy): Well, speaking as a writer (not an author -- I've never been paid for my writing, I just write), the first thing I thought of when I read this was simply that Snape wouldn't let Jo put a turban on him, he simply refused to wear one, so she had to bring in someone who would allow that. The best characters really do take on a life of their own, and often argue with their writer (and sometimes win!), and Snape is one I can easily see saying, "No, I don't care if you ARE the writer, I am NOT putting that . . . that . . . ridiculous THING on my head. It would fall off into my potions, for one thing, and for another, it doesn't fit the Slytherin image. I won't do it, no!" *** Tammy tammy at mauswerks.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tammy at mauswerks.net Wed Nov 12 00:04:15 2003 From: tammy at mauswerks.net (Tammy Rizzo) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:04:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Questions to ponder In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FB132AF.11044.1033611@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 84703 Justcarol67 wrote: > Which brings up another question we could ask Rowling without spoiling > the plot: Do Hogwarts teachers stay at the school during the summer? > And what do they do when the students are gone? (You can spend only so > much time making lesson plans and rereading the textbooks, especially > if you've been teaching the same subject for fourteen years or more. > My apologies if this question has been asked and answered before. Now me (Tammy) Hmmm. Good question. You mean, not counting the wild skinny-dipping parties in the lake, or the keggers in the prefect's bathroom? ;-> Well, if I were a Hogwarts teacher spending the summer there, I'd do a bit of shopping in Hogsmead, hang out in the library reading all the witchly romance novels I'd hidden in the Restricted Section, and spend my nights up on the Astronomy tower, trying to see Uranus. But that's just me. :) *** Tammy tammy at mauswerks.net From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 12 00:10:37 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:10:37 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84704 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > To begin with, I want to know what she meant by saying (in answer to why she made Quirrell rather than Snape the villain in SS/PS), "I know all about Snape and he'd never put on a turban." (Huh? Does that mean he'd never let another person manipulate his will by getting literally or figuratively inside his head? If not, what the heck does it mean?) > I think JKR recognized that she was talking to a very young reader who couldn't really process the idea that Snape wasn't as bad as Harry had thought him. I remember reading a George Lucas interview where he said that kids younger than six or so don't really understand how Darth Vader and Annakin Skywalker are the same character; they perceive them as two different people. Pippin From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 12 00:10:35 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:10:35 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ogg the Gamekeeper Message-ID: <14e.266033c3.2ce2d47b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84705 Carol wrote: ? and this may well be one. But if so, why bring Ogg up ? at all? I think the purpose in bringing up Ogg has yet to be fully explained. However, it was important for us to understand who trained Hagrid at his post of gamekeeper. We don't know a lot about Ogg, but then, for a long time we didn't know much about Mundungus or Mrs. Figg. I think this may be one of those names we see again. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 11 23:20:40 2003 From: nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com (nkittyhawk97) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 23:20:40 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84706 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermowninny719" wrote: > > Joe: I seem to remember that in OOP Harry was thinking about Ron > and > > it said that "The truth was that Ron had just reminded Harry > forcibly > > of another Gryffindor Quidditch player who had once sat rumpling > his > > hair under this very tree". > > > Now me: > The quote above illustrates that Harry *thought* James was in > Gryffindor. It doesn't necessarily make it true. > now for a little input from nkittyhawk *smiles*: I'm reminded of the countless times Harry sees someone who is described as "a Hufflepuff he hadn't seen before", or "a Ravenclaw he didn't know". If he hadn't seen them before, or didn't know them, how would he know if they were in Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw? I always assumed (and this was before the movies came out, so it's not contamination) that the house you belonged to was on your robes or something. How else would Harry know who was in Hufflepuff or ravenclaw if he didn't know them? This would, therefore, be a good reason that Harry would describe his father as a Gryffindor, since he had seen it for himself. From kreneeb at hotmail.com Tue Nov 11 23:23:48 2003 From: kreneeb at hotmail.com (hermionekitten9) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 23:23:48 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna Oh my! Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84707 I am new to the Harry Potter world, literally, I read all five books after Order of the Phoenix arrived (Looks around the room and grins nervously) And even though I don't think the love life of our teenage boy is going to be a great significance in the upcoming books. I would like to see Harry walking into the sunset with "his" girl. (I think he'll earn it) Which is why I decided to post. It seems to me that the major "SHIPS" people seem to like are H/H, H/G, and H/L is it only me? Or does anyone else out there think that none of these girls are right for Harry? Harry and Hermione? This ship makes me uneasy because I absolutely love Hermione and the Friendship she has with Harry. I don't really want to see any of the trio getting together. I think that their friendship is much more important then if they just "hook up" (shout it out if you agree with me) Harry and Ginny? (Pulls on my Mask and rubs the burning tattoo on her left arm, I just received an order from my dark lord, must destroy One Big Happy Weasley Family, and starts thinking of a Vile curse, that hopefully won't backfire *Grins* to stop all the cuteness and fluff) I have yet to see that Ginny is the girl for Harry. This just seems to perfect and to predicable to me, which IMHO is not Rowlings style, and to Pair him up with her just so he can be part of the Weasley family implies that he's not part of the Weasley family now, Which is just upsetting. Harry and Luna? Makes me think of the American TV sitcom Dharma and Greg, and then I burst into tears. I love Luna and think that she will be a major character in the upcoming books as a valuable friend, that's what I saw when Harry watched Luna walked away while the terrible weight in his stomach lessened. Then all the other girls (Parverti, Lavender, Suzan Bones, Millicent Bulstrode *Grins again*) all seem very underdeveloped Not to be hateful to anyone's preference I love the girls in Harry's life, I think that they are powerful characters. I just don't see any of them becoming involved romantically with him in the books, they all seem like sociable friendships to me. It's not that I think Rowlings wouldn't be able to pull off a Harry/Hermione or make Harry/Ginny not so sweet. I just don't see Harry with any of girls that we know about. They all seem great for someone else, just not with our hero. I guess my question is how many people think that Rowlings will create a new character or develop one she already has? (Morag Mcdougal, Lisa Turpin) Do you think that it would be authentic with only two books left? I'm not looking for an big chested, blonde hair, blue eyed American exchange student that will help defeat lord V, redeem Draco, becomes a couch shrink to Snape, ends up being Dumbledore's granddaughter, and still has time to practice her cheerleading. I'm just curious to see how many people can picture Rowlings pulling another Scabbers the rat on her readers? We all think its going to be Luna then Surprise Sally-Anne Perks comes swooping down on her broom, and if this were to happen how upset would you be that it wasn't your favorite? Kitten Who can now fully understand why her roommate fell to her knees with tears of joy streaming down her face when it was announced that the next Harry Potter book is going be out June 21. From nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 00:01:07 2003 From: nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com (nkittyhawk97) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:01:07 -0000 Subject: Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Lucius Malfoy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84708 Alright. Since all of this 'contamination' I've decided just to rely on my own timelines that I've drawn out for myself. But, if I see something that I think is wrong, I feel I have to point it out. If you look at the Lexicon timeline with all the Hogwarts students and when they were students it shows Lucius Malfoy as being older (exceptionally older) than the Marauders. Where's the canon proof of that? (also regarding the fact that he has a son the same age as James's son) ___nittyhawk (who is addicted to quotes) From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 00:43:29 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:43:29 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84709 > >Joe: I find in really hard to believe that Harry would never have > asked anyone what house his parents were in in the last 5 years. I > would think that common sense would tell us that if Harry refers to > his father as a Gryffindor then it is most likely true. > > Also, Isn't James' middle name Godrick or is that just something that > I picked up in fan fictions. I'm not sure if it has ever been > mentioned in canon or interviews? > Herm: I agree, it *is* difficult to believe that Harry hasn't asked questions about his parents. However, I find it even harder to believe that Harry would have had a conversation with someone about his parents that we weren't told about. It just isn't clear to me that James being in Gryffindor is a fact. He very well could have been. But if that's true, why doesn't JKR just come out and say it? I'll tell you why, either (a) he wasn't in Gryffindor and she doesn't want to ruin the surprise yet, or (b) she is misleading us on purpose. I've never heard mention of James' middle name or even initial. Since I don't read fan fiction, you may have heard it there. If you can find canon to support his middle name or initial, I'd be interested to check it out. -Hermowninny From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 12 00:46:33 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:46:33 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Page 583 OoP- hint to Book Six from an interview Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84710 Like the big dolt that I am, I ran a search on HP book 6 just to see what came up and found on BBCnewsround a snip of an interview with JKR that said what she was to read at the Royal Albert Hall event had something to do with book six. I quickly flipped over to the Bloomsbury site and read the transcript. The page she reads from is 583, OoP Bloomsbury UK edition. Page 583 is the scene where Harry hurriedly leaves Divination because he has forgotten his Career Advice appointment to find Dolores Umbridge overseeing his meeting with McGonagall. This is also the page where he discusses wanting to be an auror. I don't know if anyone had found this information and checked before. -Tonks ( who really is pathetic for wanting book six already) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 08:50:17 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:50:17 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Lucius Malfoy References: Message-ID: <006101c3a8fa$028225c0$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84711 > ___nittyhawk > Alright. Since all of this 'contamination' I've decided just to rely > on my own timelines that I've drawn out for myself. > But, if I see something that I think is wrong, I feel I have to > point it out. If you look at the Lexicon timeline with all the > Hogwarts students and when they were students it shows Lucius Malfoy > as being older (exceptionally older) than the Marauders. Where's the > canon proof of that? (also regarding the fact that he has a son the > same age as James's son) K Firstly remember James had Harry very young so it wouldn't be surprising for Lucius to be older. Secondly the Daily Prophet lists him as 41 in OoP. Now personally I wouldn't trust the Prophet to spell their own name right two times out of three, but I suspect they'd rather not upset someone as rich and powerful as a Malfoy over something as easy to check as his age. K From MadameSSnape at aol.com Wed Nov 12 00:51:29 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:51:29 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Lucius Malfoy Message-ID: <79.1c537745.2ce2de11@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84712 In a message dated 11/11/2003 7:44:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com writes: Alright. Since all of this 'contamination' I've decided just to rely on my own timelines that I've drawn out for myself. But, if I see something that I think is wrong, I feel I have to point it out. If you look at the Lexicon timeline with all the Hogwarts students and when they were students it shows Lucius Malfoy as being older (exceptionally older) than the Marauders. Where's the canon proof of that? (also regarding the fact that he has a son the same age as James's son) ___nittyhawk (who is addicted to quotes) Sherrie here: Lucius' age is given in OotP - in the article regarding Umbridge's appointment as High Inquisitor, IIRC. He's listed as 41 at that time. In an interview given around the time of the release of GoF, JKR states that Snape (& by extension the Marauders) is 35 or 36 at that point. Therefore, there is a 5 or 6 year age difference between the two. If they were the same age, I think Harry would have marked Lucius' presence in the OWL hall. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 12 00:53:18 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:53:18 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor Message-ID: <12.38796fac.2ce2de7e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84713 Hermiowninny writes: ? It just isn't clear to me that James being in Gryffindor is ? a fact. He very well could have been. But if that's ? true, why doesn't JKR just come out and say it? I'll ? tell you why, either (a) he wasn't in Gryffindor and she ? doesn't want to ruin the surprise yet, or (b) she is ? misleading us on purpose. ( first off, so hard for me not to type Ninny as my dog is Hermione and that is what I am constantly calling her) Anyway, back to topic. I wouldn't be surprised if JKR were hiding something from us, but I still think James was a Gryffindor. There have been so many clues alluding to the fact, which again makes your suspicions more than valid; however and this is movie contamination, but I have a point, I thought that the plaque in the film stated it-- I may be wrong. The only reason I bring this up is because on the CoS dvd, she says she has a lot of input in the interview- she works with her screen writers, so I would think that she would not allow a blatant disregard for her vision to take place. Again, I may be wrong. Even from all the evidence in canon, I still think the whole gang to be Gryffindor. It would certainly be an interesting twist to find initial beliefs that some of us stand by absolutely wrong. ;) Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 00:50:12 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:50:12 -0000 Subject: uniforms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84714 > ARYA said: > The only classes that we seem to have any canon evidence for the > classes being mixed together is for Potions with the Slytherins and > Herbology with the Hufflepuffs. It hasn't ever been mentioned for > any other classes and it could be possible the classes are almost all > one house per class. Or it could be that the classes are segregated-- > Slytherins all up front and on the right, Gryffindors on the left, > Hufflepuffs, in the back, behind the Slytherins and Ravenclaws, fall > in into the last quadrant of the room. Afterall, except for > Herbology or Potions, we never hear Harry describe what any student > other than a Gryffindor says or does in class. > Actually, his first-year flying class with Madam Hooch and his classes on Care of Magical Creatures were with the Slytherins. (For all I know, he may have History of Magic with the Ravenclaws--we just don't know.) In any case, these classes are clearly small (which takes us back to JKR's very odd statement that there are about 1,000 students at Hogwarts). Notice, too, that there appear to be only ten students (and eight boggarts, not counting his own) in Lupin's first DADA class. If the school population is that small, the teachers wouldn't have any trouble identifying students' houses. My assumption (and, yes, I know that's all it is) is that certain teachers (Snape, MacGonagall, Flitwick, Sprout) teach every student for the first five years (till O.W.L.S.) because their classes are mandatory. These teachers could be expected to know every students' name and house. Others, like the divination and arithmancy teachers, would know only those older students who choose to take their courses. The four teachers I named are the heads of their respective houses, which would give them an additional motivation for quickly becoming acquainted with one fourth of the student body. If I'm right, these teachers, at least, would have no need for distinguishing badges to determine the houses of the students they encountered. (The everyday robes we know to be black.) Carol From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 12 00:59:12 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 19:59:12 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Lucius Malfoy Message-ID: <127.3425bd71.2ce2dfe0@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84715 ? > ___nittyhawk writes: > Alright. Since all of this ? 'contamination' I've decided just to rely > on my own ? timelines that I've drawn out for myself. > But, if I ? see something that I think is wrong, I feel I have to > ? point it out. If you look at the Lexicon timeline with all ? the > Hogwarts students and when they were ? students it shows Lucius Malfoy > as being older ? (exceptionally older) than the Marauders. Where's the ? > canon proof of that? (also regarding the fact that ? he has a son the > same age as James's son) and then K ? Firstly remember James had Harry very young so it ? wouldn't be surprising for Lucius to be older. Secondly ? the Daily Prophet lists him as 41 in OoP. Now ? personally I wouldn't trust the Prophet to spell their own ? name right two times out of three, but I suspect they'd ? rather not upset someone as rich and powerful as a ? Malfoy over something as easy to check as his age. K now me: I agree with K here. We know that wizard life spans are longer than muggles. Despite that, wizards just as muggles probably have their children at different ages depending on their lives. Lily and James had Harry younger than Lucius and Narcissa had Draco, it really isn't surprising or abnormal. My mum is sixty, but I have friends my exact age who's parents are only 50 some younger. My mum waited until she was older than their parents. I would assume it works the same way in all communities. It doesn't seem a bit odd to me at all. I believe we have gauged the marauders somewhere near mid-thirty? It would make perfect sense. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 00:52:36 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:52:36 -0000 Subject: Medieval Armor in Hogwarts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84716 Carol wrote: >But it seems like a strange possession for > Godric Gryffindor unless he occasionally passed as a muggle and fought > in their wars. I always assumed that the sword was enchanted. Didn't Dumbledore say "only a true Gryffindor could have pulled that out of the hat". Seeing as it belonged to a wizard and only a "true Gryffindor" can pull it out of a talking hat *grin*, I assumed it was magic. Now however I see that that was an assumption. Also, if wizards carried muggle weapons to pass as muggles, I can't see them resisting the urge to enchant them. Remember, this was way before the MoM let alone the "Misuse of Muggle artifacts" office. > The suits of armor also seem odd now that you mention it > But what about the portrait of Sir Cadogan? Surely he > was a wizard--if not, what is his portrait doing in Hogwarts? Or maybe > the paintings, which include one of a group of monks, are enchanted > muggle artifacts? Monkhood and wizardry don't seem to go together. I simply thought the castle simply had a variety of pictures. We do not know that all of the pictures have to be of witches and wizards. The monks and the suits of armor are medieval. Didn't wizards withdraw from muggles about that time? Before the wizards withrew and created the WW, muggles and wizards intermingled more. I wouldn't be surprised that depictions of muggles were kept in wizard homes. It would have been a matter of taste not muggle-wizard politics. Sir Cardogan could have been both a wizard and a knight. There is no reason that he couldn't learn to both cast spells and joust. In fact, before wizards separated from muggles they would have simply been a part of their society. Also, perhaps Wizards do have (or had) their own monks. JKR hasn't mentioned any WW religion, but canon isn't complete yet. > same could apply to the suits of armor: neither wizard armor nor > battle trophies, just medieval relics under some sort of animating > charm. But that can't be the case for Gryffindor's sword, which seems > to be a real weapon. So I'm right back where I started. Unconfuse me, > somebody. > > Carol Yes. The armor could be animated medieval relics. As far as Gryffindor's sword, I addressed that eariler in this post. I hope this helps unconfuse you, but knowing me I probably confused you more. Yolanda From lmbolland at earthlink.net Wed Nov 12 01:13:16 2003 From: lmbolland at earthlink.net (goodnight_moon5) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 01:13:16 -0000 Subject: uniforms In-Reply-To: <3FB16EEA.4000501@ipartner.com.pl> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84717 "Przemyslaw Plaskowicki" wrote: > Not quite. The next sentence in OotP is: "He had seen a badge just like > this on Percy's chest on his very first day at Hogwarts." > But, of course, this is a flint since in earlier in OotP badge is > described as: "scarlet and gold" while is PS/SS it is: "shiny silver > badge (...) with the letter P on it" Thank you for the quote Przemyslaw. It may not be a flint. Imagine the badges themselves are shiny silver. In the center of the flat area of the badge would be the house design - in this case a scarlet and gold lion design. Then superimposed over the lion design would be a large P. (Nothing wrong with a good, healthy P.) They could be quite ornate and multicolored and still be in canon. I'm not trying to split hairs, just trying to assist JKR out of any flint allegations. :) Lauri From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 01:31:15 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 01:31:15 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84718 Joe wrote: > I find in really hard to believe that Harry would never have > asked anyone what house his parents were in in the last 5 years. I > would think that common sense would tell us that if Harry refers to > his father as a Gryffindor then it is most likely true. > > Also, Isn't James' middle name Godrick or is that just something that > I picked up in fan fictions. I'm not sure if it has ever been > mentioned in canon or interviews? > > -Joe Possibly you're thinking of Godric's Hollow, where James and Lily were (unsuccessfully) hiding from Voldemort. That seems to be yet another indication of James's connection to Gryffindor. (Why James and not Lily? Because Lily is muggle-born.) I have absolutely no doubt that JKR expects her readers to make the connection for themselves. Another (minor) point: If a reader asks JKR "What position did James Potter play for the Gryffindor quidditch team?" she's not going to say, "He was the Gryffindor chaser" or "the position he played for Gryffindor was chaser." "He was a chaser" supplies all the needed information. The rest is supplied in the question. She probably regarded it as a straightforward question like the one about Lily's maiden name. Carol From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 01:35:09 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 01:35:09 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84719 Hermowninny wrote: >>The quote above illustrates that Harry *thought* James was in Gryffindor. It doesn't necessarily make it true.>> nkittyhawk responded: >I'm reminded of the countless times Harry sees someone who is described as "a Hufflepuff he hadn't seen before", or "a Ravenclaw he didn't know". If he hadn't seen them before, or didn't know them, how would he know if they were in Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw? I always assumed (and this was before the movies came out, so it's not contamination) that the house you belonged to was on your robes or something. How else would Harry know who was in Hufflepuff or ravenclaw if he didn't know them? This would, therefore, be a good reason that Harry would describe his father as a Gryffindor, since he had seen it for himself.> Hermowninny now writes: I can recall Harry saying "that person was a Revenclaw he didn't know." But I can't recall him saying "someone was a Hufflepuff he hadn't seen before." Surely with the whole school gathering for feasts he has at least laid eyes on all of them. He could have seen someone sitting at a house table and therefore knew which house they were in. The question of house markings on their uniforms is currently up for debate in another thread. I'm not going there, but there are several ways he could know what house a person belongs to without knowing that person. (sitting at house tables, with a group of same-house friends, etc.) I don't see any way he could know James' house unless (a) someone told him off-camera or (b) there were house marking on their uniforms in the pensieve scene. -Hermowninny From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 01:47:54 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 01:47:54 -0000 Subject: asking the question In-Reply-To: <200311120136.40743.silmariel@telefonica.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84720 Silmariel wrote: > Given DD's statement, refering to Snape's hate of James, that he as > an old man didn't remember that some scars run too deep to be > healed, what is Snape's scar? > > Note: to me the answer is not the Prank because I think it does not > justify that intensity of hate when your enemy has been dead 14 > years. To me, that's not a 'scar not to be healed', it is a scar > you can heal or not, but depending on the person, not something so > deep that it is Ever So Present after 14 years. I think it's the humiliation of having been publicly hung upsidedown with his dingy underwear showing. It would be very hard to forgive or forget something like that, and the pain of having the son of the person responsible witness it in the Pensieve would be excruciating. Snape would think that Harry had deliberately chosen to pry into his most painful memories. I think that scar, in combination with one created by the Prank (and the resulting life debt), will only heal when Snape has saved Harry's life in some spectacular way that Harry openly and gratefully acknowledges, probably near the end of Book 7. Carol From amani at charter.net Wed Nov 12 01:51:04 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:51:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna Oh my! References: Message-ID: <014b01c3a8bf$700065c0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84721 Kitten: I am new to the Harry Potter world, literally, I read all five books after Order of the Phoenix arrived (Looks around the room and grins nervously) Taryn: First off, welcome to the world of waiting! ^_~ Kitten: And even though I don't think the love life of our teenage boy is going to be a great significance in the upcoming books. I would like to see Harry walking into the sunset with "his" girl. (I think he'll earn it) Which is why I decided to post. It seems to me that the major "SHIPS" people seem to like are H/H, H/G, and H/L is it only me? Or does anyone else out there think that none of these girls are right for Harry? Taryn: There ARE some people, among which I count myself, who think that Harry shouldn't get together with ANYONE. It may just be my Irish blood and its thirst for tragedy, but I feel that Harry is destined, at the end of everything, to be alone in more than one way. He will face Voldemort alone. He's been set apart from others his whole life, even from his best friends. Even they understand that it's his destiny to stand as a lone hero. He's an epic hero, and epic heros rarely have time for romantic attachments. It usually clashes with their saving the world. ^_^;; I'm not so much for any Harry SHIP (including Harry with no one) than I am AGAINST the H/Hr ship. And this is not my preference for R/Hr, which is not so strong as to block out any other possible SHIP's with them, then the fact that I find Harry and Hermione so UTTERLY platonic. You could have POSSIBLY (a pretty small possibly, at that) convinced be before OotP, but the last book just sealed their brother-sister relationship in for me. However, OotP also introduced Luna. And Luna's surprisingly similar to Harry in that she's set apart from others, albeit for different reasons, and that she also understands loss. Their scene in the book where Harry surprisingly finds Luna is the one he can talk to is very telling of a possible connection between the two. H/L is maybe a Harry SHIP I could believe in and I'll be very interested to see what develops in the next book. (I, for one, don't believe at all that Luna liked Ron in OotP--I thought the evidence of it was just her quirky way of acting. ^_^;;) Harry and Ginny I can see, but only because of her very cool development in OotP (especially developing AWAY from her hero-worship of Harry). I think she still likes him, but she's an independent, strong young woman and doesn't have to get weighed down with it. ---------- Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From suzchiles at msn.com Wed Nov 12 02:35:14 2003 From: suzchiles at msn.com (Suzanne Chiles) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 18:35:14 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why need more? References: <20031111192140.74496.qmail@web40508.mail.yahoo.com> <004501c3a89c$e92b4f00$f1f51d43@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84722 Iggy said: > She has still made sure he was taken care of (not in four-star quality, but > better than being in an orphanage...) I don't think you can assume that. I'd bet that if Harry had been raised in an orphanage, he'd have had clothes that fit and I also suspect they'd have fixed his glasses. I also imagine he'd have had more food to eat. Suzanne From oppen at mycns.net Wed Nov 12 02:44:08 2003 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 20:44:08 -0600 Subject: The Polyjuice Incident and House Identification Message-ID: <00a901c3a8c6$deea64c0$4e570043@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 84723 One possible explanation for Ron and Harry's mistake with the Ravenclaw girl when they, having Polyjuiced themselves into the image of the Stones-that-Speak to gain entry into the Slytherins' sanctum, was that they saw her from the back...and whatever House badges, emblems, and so on Hogwarts may have are on the _front_ of the robes. Some schools that require uniform-wear of their students may have headgear (like the caps in House colors in Kipling's _Stalky & Co._) that permits identification of a wearer's House affiliation at a distance. From what I've seen, Hogwarts students very seldom _wear_ hats...at least I can't think of any place where they're mentioned after the shopping list in the first book. (Hat question: Do their hats have brims like Gandalf's hat, or are they more like "dunce caps?") Most uniforms, not just school uniforms, tend to have distinguishing marks on the front, instead of the back. Looked at from the back, a general's uniform wouldn't be too much different from a second-lieutenant's, particularly at first glance in light that isn't all it might be. So-o-o, I think it's perfectly possible for there to be House emblems (as there were in the Celluloid Thingy That Must Not Be Mentioned On This List) and for Harry and Ron to not have been able to tell a Ravenclaw they didn't know from a Slytherin, when she was seen from the back. From cristina_angelo at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 02:49:03 2003 From: cristina_angelo at yahoo.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Cristina_Rebelo_=C2ngelo?=) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 03:49:03 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: uniforms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84724 Yolanda wrote: They don't wear house specific markings. Remember in CoS when Harry and Ron disguised as Slytherins asked a girl where the Slytherin common room was and she said she was in Ravenclaw. They never could have mistaken a student from one house for another if they wore markings. They wouldn't have had to guess who was a Slytherin in the first place. House markings would have solved that problem easily. sachmet96 wrote: I just reread the passage and she sounded to me that she thought they were stupid to even assume she was Slytherin which implies to me that it must have been obvious she was a Ravenclaw. ARYA NOW: Actually, it could also just be that she took offense at being mistaken as a Slytherin. (*gasp*!!! what an awful thing to accuse someone to be!!!) Not to mention the fact that she might have been offended that other students didn't know the name of a Prefect. (Maybe she and PErcy bonded because of mutual bigheadedness. Hmmm, I wonder if Perce is still seeing that muggleborn...) Cristina: I think it's important to specify that they weren't disguised as Slytherins, they "were" Crabbe and Goyle. Percy "recognizes" Crabbe, after that encounter with the girl. They must have been pretty recognizable by most people at Hogwarts (IMO), and recognized even if in full Gryffindor Quidditch apparel.... Let me quote the passage: "Excuse me, " said Ron, hurrying up to her. "We've forgotten the way to our common room" "I beg your pardon?" said the girl stiffly. "Our common room? I'm a Ravenclaw" CoS, USA p 219 Even if Ron has just said "the Slytherins always come up to breakfast from over there", she may or may not have heard that, she had just "emerged from the entrance" (I don't know if we can establish their exact distance, and that Ron hurried to her means little) but that sentence alone doesn't necessarily identifies them as Slytherins. The exchange doesn't mention the boys' house. So, she knows they are not in her house, and some way she knows who they are or which house they belong to. I always read that passage as the girl recognizing them for Crabbe and Goyle, knowing they were Slytherins, plus, indeed, taking offense at being identified as one of them. I always pictured her going away shaking her head at another proof of the boys' stupidity. I know there are other opinions, but I always assumed that, house being important, they all have a pretty good idea who belongs to their house, even if they don't know the names, at least the faces - okay, maybe if not all, but there's always people who know this sort of stuff, and it gets around with conversation in the common room. Slytherins, in particular, and oh so especially anybody close to Draco, would have a very strong sense of the house, and know who was and who wasn't (and despise those who weren't, and be able to point them out). Draco would know every single one of them; Crabbe and Goyle might mistake themselves for a Ravenclaw, Gryffindor or Hufflepuff if not always together... Similarly, Ravenclaws would have known who their Prefect was... They all have the same common room after all, Prefects are easy to single out, and a "wise old" "ready mind" Ravenclaw would certainly be expected to have that knowledge (as well as knowing who is who in the entire Hogwarts student and teacher population...). Now, how come she identified them as "not of her own"? Either, like Percy, she knew, like, everybody, or they had markings, or she did identify them as Crabbe and Goyle because they would be easy to identify ... Notice, however, how Harmione gets hold of the robes... US, p 215 : "And I sneaked these spare robes out of the laundry (...) you'll need bigger sizes once you're Crabbe and Goyle". She doesn't mention Slyhterins robes. She just says "bigger". Now, if there was some sort of marking... Hermione, being Hermione, would probably have said something like "these spare Slytherin robes" or something. She doesn't mention difference of size between herself and Millicent, but Harry later says that she's "no pixie" because of lack of space in the bathroom cubicle. Hermione doesn't reply. Somehow, I think she also needed bigger robes, but that's my opinion. On how the girl perceived it, notice the italics (doubt my quote comes out with formatting): "our", "I'm". I'd say that's taking offense... C *** Cristina Rebelo ?ngelo HYPERLINK "http://www.cangelo.novelcity.com/"www.cangelo.novelcity.com / ICQ 106255886 / Yahoo Messenger cristina_angelo / Fax (USA) 001-425-920-0285 HPGCv1 a31 e++ x+ -- z+++ A27 Rhp HPa S+++ Mo HaP++ HG++ RW++ AD++ RH+++ VK& NhN& SB& DM--- O++ F sfD Any attached file not mentioned in the body of the message may be a virus; if present, delete it for the sake of your computer, and inform the sender. Thank you. "Quand on n'a que l'amour/ Pour tracer un chemin/ Et forcer le destin/ A chaque carrefour Quand on n'a que l'amour/ Pour parler aux canons/ Et rien qu'une chanson/ Pour coinvancre un tambour Alors sans avoir rien/ Que la force d'aimer/ Nous aurons dans nos mains/ Amis le monde entier" J.Brel 1956 --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.537 / Virus Database: 332 - Release Date: 06/11/2003 [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rusalka at ix.netcom.com Wed Nov 12 03:00:36 2003 From: rusalka at ix.netcom.com (marinafrants) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 03:00:36 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84725 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermowninny719" wrote: > I hate to argue (well, that's not true, I love it), but I am firmly > in the camp that JKR is purposly misleading us into believing James > was in Gryffindor only to reveal in book 6 or 7 that he was not. I suppose it's theoretically possible, but what would be the point? JKR's surprises are never gratuitous -- they always serve an important function in the story, either by furthering the plot or by affecting characterization. What, exactly, do you think JKR would achieve by suddenly going, "Hah! Fooled you!" at the tail end of the series? Whatever it is, it would have to be something incredibly bangy and important in order to justify 5-odd books' worth of carefully planted misdirection, but what the heck could it be? Making Harry reevaluate his image of his father? We just had that with the Pensieve scene in OOP. In fact, that scene would've been the perfect opportunity to spring the surprise on us, and the fact that JRK didn't indicates to me that she's never going to. Having shown us James as an arrogant, bullying jerk, throwing in "Oh, and he wasn't a Gryffindor, either" two books later would be repetetive and anticlimactic, IMO. Marina rusalka at ix.netcom.com From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Wed Nov 12 03:34:58 2003 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:34:58 +1300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna Oh my! In-Reply-To: <014b01c3a8bf$700065c0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> References: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20031112163124.00a3fb30@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 84726 At 20:51 11/11/2003 -0500, you wrote: >Taryn wrote: >There ARE some people, among which I count myself, who think that Harry >shouldn't get together with ANYONE. It may just be my Irish blood and its >thirst for tragedy, but I feel that Harry is destined, at the end of >everything, to be alone in more than one way. He will face Voldemort >alone. He's been set apart from others his whole life, even from his best >friends. Even they understand that it's his destiny to stand as a lone >hero. He's an epic hero, and epic heros rarely have time for romantic >attachments. It usually clashes with their saving the world. ^_^;; Tanya here. I agree to a point. I feel Harry should stay single also. If he becomes involved with anyone pre LV's destruction. That person then will be the number one target, and a useful hostage weapon for LV to use. But afterwards, who knows. I cannot decide on a preference myself. But if he does, might take a while after the end for things to get back to normal enough for him to want that with anyone. Tanya From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 03:37:23 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 03:37:23 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: <00a001c3a873$13ab3a80$43069e40@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84727 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" wrote: > Iggy here: > > Could this be a misquote of her...or a flint in her comments? If he was a chaser, then why did the plaque in the movie say he was a > seeker? Erin: Why do the students in the movies have ties, uniform badges, and lack hats? Because it's movie contamination. Just plain wrong. > And why was he shown in OotP playing with the snitch the way he was? Erin: Ah, well, that is trickier. Some people have written that perhaps he, like Ginny, played both Chaser and seeker in different years during his time on the team. He could have been a Seeker the year Harry saw him. > And, while I don't have the books at hand right now, wasn't he mentioned in > the books as a seeker a couple of times? Erin: No, he never has been. Erin From nibleswik at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 02:50:17 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 02:50:17 -0000 Subject: Ageism and the Futility of Blame, was: Re: Responsibility for Sirius's Death In-Reply-To: <20031111094232.86869.qmail@web25104.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84728 Udder Pendragon: > I read a lot about who is believed to be responsible for Sirisus dieing. > I don't blame Harry at all. He is only 15and there are adults(?) around him who are supposed to protect him and not, as in the case of Snape, to use him as a target for their own spite. Oh, grr! I wrote a long, detailed reply, and it got deleted. Being 15 ought not exempt one from blame. This does nothing but perpetuate an ageist system that drives every minor with half a brain completely nuts. If you tell me I'm less equipped to make my own decisions than some sorority chick who spends most of her time puking or in the ER for alcohol poisoning simply because she's reached that magical age of 18, I will laugh. A lot. My parents gave me a lot of freedom from very early on, and it was the best thing they could possibly have done for me, because I learned to be responsible very early. Handing kids a whole bunch of rights on their 18th birthday seems terrible! Are they supposed to become mature overnight? Age is such a dreadful criterion for judging . . . anything, really. Most people I know aren't one age -- they may be physically 23, but mentally 40, 8 or 9 when they try to draw, 5 when upset, and 3 when asked to sit still. I know people my age (14) who seem to me much, much older because they are emotionally more mature. Conversely, stick me in a group of 14-year olds, and I'll stick out like a sore thumb, as I spend most of my time around people over 18, as I attend college, which really doesn't help matters. So, yeah. I've veered rather off-course, haven't I? My point was that it is my belief that one should be held responsible for one's actions as soon as one is old enough to understand that actions have consequences. Harry definitely understands that, as do most 15-year olds, so he should be just as ripe a target for criticism as the next person. He knows better, as it were. Now, about the blame: I think figuring out who to blame is completely useless. The list is endless. Sure, there are the obvious ones, like LV, Bellatrix, Harry, DD, Kreacher, and Sirius himself, but that overlooks so many! -- Umbridge, for obvious reasons, Ron, Hermione, Neville, Ginny, and Luna, for helping Harry, Grawp, for not eating the lot of them, Hagrid, for not training Grawp to eat the lot of them, Sirius' parents', not just for being miserable to him, but for conceiving him in the first place, Buckbeak, for not ripping Kreacher to pieces, the employees of the MoM, for not making it absolutely impossible to get into the Department of Mysteries, and so on. Sure, I'm getting a bit outlandish with those, but they could theoretically have averted Sirius' death, couldn't they? It doesn't matter who's to blame. People make choices, and their choices will help some people and hurt others. It's really that simple, I think. Besides, worrying about blaming people is far too similar to that song from Into the Woods for my own comfort. Actually, that would make a great FILK ("So then it's Ron's fault!" "No, it's not Ron's fault!"). Cheekyweebisom From sharon8880 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 02:53:43 2003 From: sharon8880 at yahoo.com (sharon) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 02:53:43 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84729 I couldn't find this subject in the archives, so I don't know if it's been covered before, but anyway, here goes. You've got Harry Potter, the kid who defeated the strongest evil wizard of the day, arriving at Hogwarts. Everyone in the WW knows what he has done & how great it is. He's a big hero in the WW because of it. You see when he enters the Leaky Cauldron with Hagrid & is announced everyone stops what their doing to look at him or talk to him. They all recognize his significance. You would think that he would have a flock of people all around him all the time at school. But that's not the case. Except for some hero worship by Colin Creevey, most everyone leaves him alone, & they go about their business. As time goes on, you even have more people disliking him rather than liking him. You would think that alot of people would want to be in his company & hang out with him because of him being this important "savior" image to the WW. You would think he would be one of the cool crowd of kids that everyone would want to say was his best friend. Anyone have any thoughts on why Harry isn't hero worshipped at school for his past achievement? Sharon From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 12 03:40:32 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:40:32 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna Oh my! Message-ID: <3e.377852c2.2ce305b0@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84730 swaine.t at xtra.co.nz, In reference to your comment: ? I agree to a point. I feel Harry should stay single also. ? If he becomes involved with anyone pre LV's ? destruction. That person then will be the number one ? target, and a useful hostage weapon for LV to use. But ? afterwards, who knows. I cannot decide on a ? preference myself. But if he does, might take a while ? after the end for things to get back to normal enough ? for him to want that with anyone. OK, I know this is a stretch because I agree with you, but to throw something out there that would mirror the past. Harry *does* fall in love- madly so, and to protect the object of his affections his must use a secret keeper! Probably never to happen, but it would be fun. ;) -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 02:37:34 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 02:37:34 -0000 Subject: Small correction In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84731 > Kitten wrote as a post script: > Who can now fully understand why her roommate fell to her knees with > tears of joy streaming down her face when it was announced that the > next Harry Potter book is going be out June 21. I'm sorry to disillusion your roommate, but it's the PoA movie that's coming out June 21. The next Potter book is several years away. As for your SHIPper question, I don't go in for that sort of thing, but it would be nice to see Ginny paired off with loyal Neville and JKR herself has made it pretty clear that Hermione and Ron will pair off, so that does seem to leave Harry with Luna, who is at least more interesting than Cho. Carol From FldaGirl27 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 02:37:39 2003 From: FldaGirl27 at aol.com (FldaGirl27 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 21:37:39 -0500 Subject: non-human students -- Where are they? Message-ID: <23B0C429.438A3896.0B3CE0FA@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84732 --------------------- Am I tainted by the movie or is Flitwick not a human? If so, he was a student at Hogwarts at one point (he's the head of his house) -- so where are the other non-human students at Hogwarts? I know there has been guessing about some students being part-something, none of them are as outwardly something-else like Flitwick. Thoughts? kneazelkid --------------------- As far as I know he was just a really short human. I do not really know why the movie pictured him to look like a beefed up house-elf. There might be werewolves however because DD has allowed them into the school before... Some time ago in another group someone speculated Millicent B. was part hag.. but nothing has been proven yet. AJaKe From mookie1552 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 03:10:34 2003 From: mookie1552 at aol.com (Jennifer) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 03:10:34 -0000 Subject: uniforms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84733 I agree, we don't know what their uniforms look like. Until the movie, I just assumed they wore street clothes under a cape. That was how I imagined it. If you look at the cover of any of the books, besides a cloak, none of the characters featured, mostly Harry and Ginny are wearing anything that resembles a uniform that would identify their house. Personally, I do not like the fact that they mack such a distinction among the uniforms in the movie. It alienates and divides the students. There should be some kind of healthy competition among students which should be based only on House Points, but when you start dressing students differently based on their house, it takes the commoradity away from the school, that they should be working together for a common goal not against one another. Colors can divide, we've learned that already. Jen From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 03:12:28 2003 From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 03:12:28 -0000 Subject: Hagrid Apparated? In-Reply-To: <001d01c3a8ee$697f7770$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84734 > > > So that implies then that Hagrid is extra skilled at apparation, even though it is illegal for him to perform magic and he was never very good at it anyway. Hermowninny: > > Forgive me for not knowing, but when did Hagrid apparate? K: > Well I don't know if this is what she meant but at the beginning of PS he seems to arrive at the rocky island the Dursleys are hiding on without a boat (at least he uses theirs to leave). >>> psychobirdgirl again: What I meant was, in the post I was replying to someone said that Hagrid's sudden disappearance at the train station was attributed to or most likely caused by disapparition. I thought that that was highly unlikely also and was wondering if there was something to it. sorry for the confusion, psychobirdgirl p.s. I think Dumbledore had a hand in his disappearance. From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 02:04:26 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 02:04:26 -0000 Subject: Avada Kedavra Meaning Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84735 I was meandering through some old intervews this evening, just for kicks when I came across the following Q&A from a Carnes & Noble Chat on October 20, 2000: Q: Where do you come up with the words that you use, the names of the classes and spells and games, etc.? For example, the Patronus Expectumous, was it? A: Expecto Patronum -- you were close! That's Latin. Go and look it up -- a little investigation is good for a person! Mostly I invent spells, but some of them have particular meanings. Like "avada kedavra" -- I bet someone out there knows what that means. I know there's someone in the groups that can enlighten me as to the meaning of Avada Kedavra. Also, I'd really like to know where on the net I can look up latin meanings. Thanks -Hermowninny From steve at hp-lexicon.org Wed Nov 12 04:07:48 2003 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:07:48 -0000 Subject: Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Lucius Malfoy In-Reply-To: <127.3425bd71.2ce2dfe0@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84736 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > I believe we have gauged the marauders somewhere near mid-thirty? It would > make perfect sense. > -Tonks Harry sees James and the others in the Pensieve taking their OWLs. At that time, his father was sixteen or possibly still fifteen. In chapter 29, this phrase appears: "He could abandon the plan and simply learn to live with the memory of what his father had done on a summer's day more than twenty years ago " That means that Harry is a little more than twenty years younger than his father. It is unlikely that the difference is as much as 25 years or the phrase would be "almost 25 years" or "more than 25 years ago." James and his friends (who are never called The Marauders in the book, by the way...talk about contamination!) are or would be about 36 years old in book five. Lucius Malfoy is 41. Steve Vander Ark The Harry Potter Lexicon From nibleswik at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 03:34:39 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 03:34:39 -0000 Subject: Slytherin Sirius?, was: Of course Snape is a Slytherin In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE46261C@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84737 Cheekyweebisom: > I'm interested in why so many people think/thought Sirius was a > Slytherin. I don't get it at all: he's not particularly > cunning or ambitious, though he IS very, very brave (and is > described as such by DD himself), he was best friends with James, > and his mother hates him. These all seem to point to Gryffindor, > don't they? What points to Slytherin? I'm very curious. Tonya: > I think that Sirius's family points to Slytherin BUT I really > believe that people change and I think that JKR thinks so also. Me (Cheekyweebisom): But families aren't always in the same houses. Parvati and Padma Patil spring immediately to mind. Granted, a family like the Blacks would make Slytherin-hood likely, but not definite. DD statement in CoS that our choices make us who we are far more than our abilities could be easily applied to Sirius, simply changing the word "abilities" for the word "heritage". Sirius decided not to be what his family was very early on. Tonya: > My belief is that maybe in first year MAYBE Sirius was put in Slytherin and > I think that as he grew up he decided that was not the life that he > wanted. Me (Cheekyweebisom): Do you mean that you think he switched houses? If so, JKR's given us no indication that that EVER happens, and like I said, his personality and his choices all point, if not to Gryffindor, then at least to a house other than Slytherin. Cheekyweebisom, who is becoming increasingly obsessed with her hopes that Draco Malfoy will become a three-dimensional character, and ideally, not an evil one, and who is really starting to consider the possibility of ESE!Lupin. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 02:08:41 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 02:08:41 -0000 Subject: Tur-bans or Too-Much (was Re: Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: <3FB13131.26206.FD5E8F@localhost> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84738 Someone, but I *THINK* it was justcarol67, said: > > To begin with, I want to know what she [Rowling] meant by saying > > (in answer to why she made Quirrell rather than Snape the villain in > > SS/PS), "I know all about Snape and he'd never put on a turban." > > (Huh? Does that mean he'd never let another person manipulate his > > will by getting literally or figuratively inside his head? If not, > > what the heck does it mean?) Now me (Tammy): > Well, speaking as a writer (not an author -- I've never been paid for my writing, I just write), the first thing I thought of when I read this was simply that Snape wouldn't let Jo put a turban on him, he simply refused to wear one, so she had to bring in someone who would allow that. The best characters really do take on a life of their own, and often argue with their writer (and sometimes win!), and Snape is one I can easily see saying, "No, I don't care if you ARE the writer, I am NOT putting that . . . that . . . ridiculous THING on my head. It would fall off into my potions, for one thing, and for another, it doesn't fit the Slytherin image. I won't do it, no!" >>> Yes. I did write the quoted paragraph (didn't I sign it?) but please call me Carol, not justcarol67. Thanks for the humorous response. I'm also a writer (or was once) and I know what you mean about characters having lives of their own, but I don't think JKR ever planned for Snape to be the villain of SS/PS. He was the counter-villain, the suspect who turns out to be a false lead. Maybe that was what she meant: the turban wearer had to be weak and gullible (as Voldemort himself says in GoF), and Snape is far from being either one? Another thought. I wonder if Quirrell was a Slytherin, or is this another instance of Hagrid being wrong when he asserts that "there wasn't a witch or wizard who went bad who wasn't a Slytherin"? (Of course he was referring to the DEs, but maybe Quirrell is another Peter Pettigrew type, corrupted by LV without being the classic cunning, ambitious Slytherin. (Note: I didn't say evil. Snape is my favorite character, as you may have noticed.) Carol From steve at hp-lexicon.org Wed Nov 12 04:15:36 2003 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:15:36 -0000 Subject: Avada Kedavra Meaning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84739 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermowninny719" > I know there's someone in the groups that can enlighten me as to the > meaning of Avada Kedavra. Also, I'd really like to know where on the > net I can look up latin meanings. Check out the Spell Encyclopedia of the Lexicon. It includes the derivations and etymologies of every spell, including Avada Kedavra (which is Aramaic, by the way). Most of the spells are Latin, but some are from French, Old English, and even Hawaiian. Lately, the spell words have been just plain old Latin. She was much more inventive in the first book or two. If you want more Latin help, there are some good sites on the web which give Latin words. Check out the Resources page of the Lexicon. I know there's at least one on that list. Steve Vander Ark The Harry Potter Lexicon From mookie1552 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 03:35:46 2003 From: mookie1552 at aol.com (Jennifer) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 03:35:46 -0000 Subject: Heir of other houses Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84740 What do you think became of the Heirs of Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff? They are the Switzerland of Hogwarts, never in the thick of things. I wonder if their identies will be revealed and if it will play into things to come. Maybe one of the ways LV may need to be killed is that all of the heirs have to come together to vanquish LV. Harry of course is the Heir of Gryffindor. Jen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 02:30:17 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 02:30:17 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84741 -nkittyhawk wrote: > I always assumed (and this was before the movies came out, so > it's not contamination) that the house you belonged to was on > your robes or something. How else would Harry know who was in > Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw if he didn't know them? > This would, therefore, be a good reason that Harry would describe > his father as a Gryffindor, since he had seen it for himself. He could well have seen his father in his quidditch robes in the photo album Hagrid gave him. That would definitively answer the question. (I still don't know where I stand on the school robes question, but if James wasn't a Gryffindor, I'll eat the Sorting Hat.) Carol From mookie1552 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 03:27:00 2003 From: mookie1552 at aol.com (Jennifer) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 03:27:00 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84742 James was in Gryffindor for one reason. I've said it before in a previous post 83848, about Harry's true purpose and one of the reasons why his father was in Gryffindor explains it. My belief is that Harry is the Heir of Gryffindor and before Harry, so was James. His family was well off because of their family, that was the basis of Harry's inheritance. Because their family is related to Godric, all of their decendents would be in Gryffindor naturally. When LV came to kill Harry's parents, (in Godric Hollow btw) LV was not going to kill Lily. LV only wanted James and Harry...why? Because they are related to Godric Gryffindor the opposite of LV, who is the Heir of Slytherin. LV wanted to eliminate any threat to him, I think being heir to one of the most powerful wizards of the age has some advantage and LV wanted to get rid of that. I always thought that LV killed only James and Lily because they were part of the OoP and that they were against him. Obviously that is not so. Jen From mookie1552 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 03:31:00 2003 From: mookie1552 at aol.com (Jennifer) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 03:31:00 -0000 Subject: Lily's and James' Parents Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84743 Does anyone have any suspicions to how Lily's or James' parents died. It was close after graduating from Hogwarts. Their parents would not have been old because Lily and James were in their late teens, early twenties when they died. Do you think it has to do with LV????? I do... I know JKR has not made this an issue but maybe Harry's grandparents' history will have some light shed on it, or Petunia will hold the key or spill the beans. jen From steve at hp-lexicon.org Wed Nov 12 04:28:40 2003 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:28:40 -0000 Subject: Heir of other houses In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84744 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jennifer" wrote: > What do you think became of the Heirs of Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff? > > They are the Switzerland of Hogwarts, never in the thick of things. I > wonder if their identies will be revealed and if it will play into > things to come. Maybe one of the ways LV may need to be killed is > that all of the heirs have to come together to vanquish LV. Harry of > course is the Heir of Gryffindor. After a thousand years, it is highly unlikely that they know who is the direct heir of anyone. I don't think it's even possible to trace an heir over that many centuries. Everything about the Founders is shrouded in mystery and legend. The dates aren't even precise. On the other hand, there weren't castles of any kind a thousand years ago either. Rowling can do whatever she wants with her world. In my opinion, the idea of the "Heir of Slytherin" refers to someone who rises up to champion Slytherin's ideals again, not to an actual blood heir. In that way of thinking, there isn't going to be an heir of the other houses since they don't have such a strong position that needs championing. In the books, no one is ever refered to as the heir of anything except for Slytherin, and the only time that idea comes up is in book two. The word "heir" never even appears in any other book. The whole Heir of Gryffindor idea is a fan invention. Steve Vander Ark The Harry Potter Lexicon From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 04:15:27 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:15:27 -0000 Subject: Of course Snape is a Slytherin In-Reply-To: <3FB0D61E.60508@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84745 Carol wrote: > (Snip) > He wouldn't have called Lily a "mud blood" if > his own heritage were questionable. I do think > (Snip) Jazmyn wrote: > Voldemort calls people mudbloods all the time > and he is not a pureblood. I believe Voldemort is impersonating a pureblood. He may not acutally say it, but considering his stance on the issue how many people would take him for anything else. Remember how Sirius' parents felt about Voldemort, his goals and their other son's involvement. The purebloods were rallying behind him. Would so many purebloods, especially fanatically ones like Sirius' Mom have done so if they thought he was a half-blood? Remember that Voldemort changed his name and his appearance. He even comments on how he had had no intention of keeping his muggle father's name. Dumbledore mentioned that most people didn't recognize Riddle when he re-surfaced as Voldemort. How many people know the he's Tom Riddle, a half-blood? Malfoy knows because of the diary and in CoS, he mentioned that his closest associates were already calling him Lord Voldemort, but how many people were in that group and wouldn't they keep their Lord's secret. They'd better if they don't like pain. Voldemort has a whole lot of self-hate and some major identity issues. He didn't like who he was so he remade himself in name and in body. Think about the transformations that Dumbledore mentioned. I hadn't thought of it before, but was Voldemort trying to "change" from the way he was before. I'll now go back to Snape. Everyone knows that he is whatever he is. His Slytherin housemates would definately know who's pure and who's not. So unlike Voldemort, Snape can't yell "mudblood" and hope people will think he's something else. They already know what his real parentage is. Yelling "mudblood" works for Voldemort, but not Snape. Yolanda From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 03:42:16 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 03:42:16 -0000 Subject: Of course Snape is a Slytherin In-Reply-To: <3FB1627F.3090102@subreality.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84746 Carol said: > I don't think we have any > indication that Snape is not a "pure blood." He wouldn't have called > Lily a "mud blood" if his own heritage were questionable. And Thren says: > One could make a case for > him using the term in a 'I might be low on the food chain, but still > higher than you' kind of way. It would show any Slytherins (or anyone, > really) that he had distanced himself from the more undesirable bits of > his parentage I agree with Carol. The last thing he would want is for Lily or someone else for that matter (James, Sirius) to whip around and say "That's rich coming from you, half-blood". Snape wouldn't use an insult that brings attention to his own half- blood status. Yolanda From mschelleau at yahoo.com.au Wed Nov 12 04:04:43 2003 From: mschelleau at yahoo.com.au (mschelleau) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:04:43 -0000 Subject: Tur-bans or Too-Much (was Re: Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84747 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > I said: > > To begin with, I want to know what she [Rowling] meant by saying > > (in answer to > > why she made Quirrell rather than Snape the villain in SS/PS), "I > > know all about Snape and he'd never put on a turban." (Huh? Does > > that mean he'd never let another person manipulate his will by > > getting literally or figuratively inside his head? If not, what > > the heck does it mean?) > Well, okay. But my point is that "Snape wouldn't wear a turban" is a > strange response to "Why did you make Quirrell the villain (in > SS/PS) instead of Snape?" I think she wanted to get around the > question so we wouldn't know whether Snape is a villain or not > (he's clearly not THE > villain in SS or any of the five books we've read so far, but he's > still very mysterious and she seems to want it that way). But aside > from personal tastes in clothing (haberdashery), what does "Snape > wouldn't wear a turban" really mean? That Snape wouldn't allow > someone/something inside his head that necessitated the wearing of a > turban? I understand why she wouldn't just come out and say "because > Snape isn't a villain," but why not just say, "I needed an > expendable villain who won't reenter the story. Snape is a key > character who can't be eliminated from the plot"? The turban has > nothing to do with the question as far as I can see. > > Carol, who thinks Rowling's answer was very Snapey (mysterious and > elusive) I'll admit I was looking at the content of the answer more than it's value as a response to a question. I'll rectify that now. I think JKR is well aware the ambiguity of Snape is his most powerful attribute as a character and she would be very, very careful to protect his ambivalence so his usefulness in the plot is not lost. A direct answer, or even a vaguely-direct one that is taken awry, to what seems a value laden question such as the above (where it is assumed Snape is unquentionably a villian, just not the villian of SS) would remove narrative tension around his character. Like many, I feel the question of Snape's loyalty will be integral to how the whole story is finalised and won't be resolved until almost the final page, assuming it is ever resolved. Also, this was in an interview situation and I'm assuming her response time was limited and so if she felt some concern (valid or no) that answering it may impact on future plot lines she would have gone for an amusing answer as opposed to a serious one. With reflection she may well have given a response such as you've given (which doesn't confirm or deny Snape's villiany) but in the short time she had to consider a reply she took the easy path of humour. Not sure if that will help you either. Take care Mschelle in Au From steve at hp-lexicon.org Wed Nov 12 04:36:01 2003 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:36:01 -0000 Subject: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84748 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jennifer" wrote: > Does anyone have any suspicions to how Lily's or James' parents > died. Obviously, something important to the story line, and we don't know what it is yet. Here's what Rowling had to say about that in her Q&A with the National Press Club: Q: What happened to Harry's grandparents? JKR: Um, various interesting things, but again, I'm not going to share. [laughter] Sorry! But that's okay, cause we have time for another question, cause I didn't answer that one! Steve Vander Ark The Harry Potter Lexicon From nibleswik at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 04:12:05 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:12:05 -0000 Subject: Politics, Molly's Qualities, and Sex and Swearing in HP, was: Re: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84749 Janet Anderson: > The thing is, the Harry Potter series is a deservedly well-loved >and popular work, and lots of people -- it seems to me -- would >like to see JKR use that popularity to push some agenda or other >which they think is important. If she chooses either to put > forward an agenda which differs from the reader's, or (as she has > done in my opinion) to ignore politics altogether except insofar >as it is used to tell a good story, that is also her right. Me: I agree with everything you said, except for that JKR's ignored politics altogether. First, I'd like to ask just what you mean by "except insofar as it is used to tell a good story", as that seems to me rather nebulous and subject to interpretation. As a politics fiend, whether in fiction or the real world, I don't think there's a limit to how much politics can be used to tell a good story. I don't think it's necessary, either, but nine times out of ten, political overtones increase my enjoyment of a story. The tenth time, the book tends to be written by Ann Coulter, but that's the topic for a different post on a different list. I may have been seeing politics where there was just storytelling, but to me (and many of my friends, and, I'm sure, many on this list), the Grand Inquisitorial Decrees just reeked of the Patriot Act. There are many other examples which struck me, but the fifth book seemed more overtly political than the previous ones, and you know what? I LOVED that. I was positively maniacal in my giggles as the MoM appeared to act more and more like the Bush administration. Now, a large part of this (who knows? maybe all of it) may have been that I was allowing my political views to get the better of me and falling into the common trap of, "See? This brilliant author agrees with me!" I didn't think I was doing so, but it's definitely possible. In any case, though, what makes you think HP is apolitical? I'm very interested. Janet Anderson: > The theory that because Molly does not have a salaried job she is > not a "strong character" reminds me of something that was pointed > out in the early and strident days of feminism -- that the people > who denigrate women who keep houses and raise children are insulting their own mothers and grandmothers. Where do you think the Weasley children inherited all those brains (several > Head Boys) and picked up the ethics that they display? At least half of > these qualities had to come from Molly. Me: Why at least half? It seems to me that one could belong to one of two schools of thought: the "Arthur and Molly affect their children equally", in which case it would be exactly half, school, or the "We don't know if one affected the kids more than the other" school. If you belong to the first, half of those qualities would have come from Molly. If you belong to the second, more than half might have come from Molly, but less than half might have as well. Perhaps I'm reading too much into your statement, but it comes across (to me) as, "Mothers, or at least this mother, affect their kids as much as or more than fathers." I wouldn't agree, if that is what you're saying. Furthermore, children's qualities aren't necessarily inherited -- in the case of the Weasleys, I'd probably agree with you, but in general, I think it's too much of a blanket statement. Sirius is a perfect example, as his character seems to be comprised almost entirely of deliberate efforts to be contrary to his parents' racist, archaic, and generally dreadful views. I can't come up with any other examples, probably because we see so few parent/children relationships. There's the Weasleys, the Malfoys, and to some extent, the Blacks, but that's about it, isn't it? I mean, Harry's quite unlike James in that he's much less arrogant and mean, but he also never knew his father, so I wonder how relevant that is. Janet Anderson: And can someone please explain to me why some people think there should be > more on-screen sex in these books? Me: I agree that sex in the books would add little, if anything. I'm occasionally irked by the almost complete absence of swearing, though, as it seems unrealistic to me. I know one (one!) teenager who swears as infrequently and mildly as the Harry Potter kids. Maybe this is different in England? I don't think it is, though. And maybe it would be different among a very devout set, or something. My one teenage non-swearing friend is very religious; then again, I've many more religious teenage friends who swear more than me. In any case, the HPers aren't religious, AFAIK. So my complaint is fueled by my desire for realistic dialogue. I get over it, though, because the dialogue's so wonderful aside from that, and simply tell myself that they all come from non-swearing households. While on the topic of swearing, I'm amazed at how well JKR's planned the progression of swear words used and the frequency with which they're used, through the books. She's in a tight spot, I'd imagine, not being able to have the characters swear a lot and seems to have remedied it by having them progress from no swearing in the first book to moderately frequent "damns" and "hells" and such in the fifth. Cheekyweebisom From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 04:35:12 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:35:12 -0000 Subject: Lexicon contamination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84750 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" wrote: > I dont think Harry's wanting to be in Gryffindor has anything to do > with what house his father was in. Harry was anxious to get into > Gryffindor largely because that was the house Ron wanted to be in, as > all his family were. Similarly, he was desperate not to be placed in > Slytherin because of what Hagrid had told him, and the fact that > Draco Malfoy (to whom he had taken an instant dislike) was anxious to > get into Slytherin. > The Sorting Hat's song may have influenced him a bit, but mostly I > think it was a desire to be with Ron, the first real friend he had > ever had. Harry didn't chose Gryffindor. The Sorting Hat did. The whole point of the Sorting Hat is to determine what house you would do best in. You do *not* get to chose what house you go in. Remember in PS/SS, Draco bragging that his whole family had been in Slytherin, so that he was sure to go there. Draco also mentioned how Hufflepuff was the worst and that if he was sorted into Hufflepuff he'd leave Hogwarts. If Draco could simply chose to be in Slytherin that whole conversation makes no sense. Back to Harry's sorting... The Hat made several comments about Harry that showed he could have done well in different houses. For example, "not a bad mind" would suggest Ravenclaw. Harry's "thirst to prove himself" is what prompted the Sorting Hat to say "You would do well in Slytherin." When Harry says, "Not Slytherin", the hat then puts Harry in it's second choice for him "Gryffindor". Yolanda From nibleswik at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 04:34:49 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:34:49 -0000 Subject: The Awkward Squad, was: Re: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84751 > Severus Snape is a card-carrying member, nay, an elected officer >of the Awkward Squad. As such, he resolutely refuses to be >pigeonholed. He will damn well favour Draco Malfoy (the Slytherin >alpha male) if he wants to and to hell with what we think about it. > Part of his beguiling complexity as a character is his >contradictions - though we are told again and again that he's on >the side of the Order, he hasn't quite surrendered the last of >that "little oddball up to his eyes in the dark arts," up to >history yet, has he? Oh, I so don't want to snip any of this! Alright, just a little bit. At the beginning. There. Enough? Well, thank you, Astrofiammante, for your excellent comment. Though I most certainly will not abandon my hopes that Draco will follow in Snape's footsteps, becoming the brilliant, shrewd, good guy who can still be an asshole, I love what you said. I don't think it's mutually exclusive with the possibility that Snape sees potential in Draco not just as a good wizard in the technique sense, but also ethically. No, Snape hasn't surrendered his interest in the Dark Arts, and I really hope he never will. Just as I think deciding that Slytherin is the house of the evil opens one up to less conspicuous dangers like Pettigrew (who I'm convinced was a Gryffindor, thank you very much), I believe the relative lack of education on the Dark Arts at Hogwarts is dangerous. Moody/Crouch was on to something, in my opinion, when he said one must know what one is facing. Would Harry have survived that night in the graveyard were it not for the evil teacher's lesson on the Unforgivables? Well, yes, of course. But would he if he weren't the protagonist of a popular seven-book series in its fourth book? I don't think so. And yes, there is DADA, but I don't think it's enough. Then again, I'm a big proponent of, "if you want to counter something, first learn what's behind what you're countering." Anyway, I really enjoyed your post. And I still think that with his good looks, Draco would be fantastic for Slytherin's image if he only became good. Cheekyweebisom, who really, really wants to join the Awkward Squad. From nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 01:38:55 2003 From: nkittyhawk97 at yahoo.com (nkittyhawk97) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 01:38:55 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna Oh my! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84752 Kitten "hermionekitten9" wrote: > It seems to me that the major "SHIPS" people seem to like are H/H, H/G, and H/L is it only me? Or does anyone else out there think that none of these girls are right for Harry? > > > I guess my question is how many people think that Rowling will create a new character or develop one she already has? (Morag Mcdougal, Lisa Turpin) Do you think that it would be authentic with only two books left? I'm not looking for an big chested, blonde hair, blue eyed American exchange student that will help defeat lord V, redeem Draco, becomes a couch shrink to Snape, ends up being Dumbledore's granddaughter, and still has time to practice her cheerleading. I'm just curious to see how many people can picture Rowlings pulling another Scabbers the rat on her readers? We all think its going to be Luna then Surprise Sally-Anne Perks comes swooping down on her broom, and if this were to happen how upset would you be that it wasn't your favorite? >>> nkittyhawk: Hey! Sounds a lot like me. I read 3-5 in July and 1-2 only last week. (of course, I have done a lot of re-reading) *eyes heavy with sleep deprivation* I agree completely. Maybe it's just that, in my eyes, they aren't right for him. I think becoming an obsessed rabid fanatic has made me picky. (Don't hurt me) I am a RW/HG shipper (and proud of it). Honestly, why would JK foreshadow it so much if she was just gonna do nuthin about it? All that would come through is an awkward friendship. (and please note, that it *is* a bit awkward) Personally, I find the constant bickering kinda cute. There's no doubt there'll be a new character (or more than one, I'm sure) in book 6 (and book 7). I DO NOT expect a Mary-Sue-ish character, and in fact, I will be quite murderous if that is the case (which I know it won't be). Cheers! *hugs and jelly beans* __nkittyhawk From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 02:19:23 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 02:19:23 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84753 I wrote: > > > > To begin with, I want to know what she meant by saying (in > answer to why she made Quirrell rather than Snape the villain in > SS/PS), "I know all about Snape and he'd never put on a turban." > (Huh? Does that mean he'd never let another person manipulate > his will by getting literally or figuratively inside his head? If > not, what the heck does it mean?) Pippin: > I think JKR recognized that she was talking to a very young > reader who couldn't really process the idea that Snape wasn't as > bad as Harry had thought him. > > I remember reading a George Lucas interview where he said > that kids younger than six or so don't really understand how > Darth Vader and Annakin Skywalker are the same character; they > perceive them as two different people. Interesting theory, but if that's the case, a straightforward answer would have served her purpose better. I'm not sure that it was a young reader, though, since the quotation comes from a chat transcript. It could have been an adult or mature teenager. I still think there's some significance to such an indirect, unexpected answer. Then again, maybe she was just feeling mischievous or didn't want to give too much away at that early point in the series. Carol From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 04:31:19 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:31:19 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84754 Hermowninny wrote: > > I hate to argue (well, that's not true, I love it), but I am > firmly > > in the camp that JKR is purposly misleading us into believing > James > > was in Gryffindor only to reveal in book 6 or 7 that he was not. > > Marina wrote: I suppose it's theoretically possible, but what would be the point? > JKR's surprises are never gratuitous -- they always serve an > important function in the story, either by furthering the plot or by > affecting characterization. What, exactly, do you think JKR would > achieve by suddenly going, "Hah! Fooled you!" at the tail end of the > series? Whatever it is, it would have to be something incredibly > bangy and important in order to justify 5-odd books' worth of > carefully planted misdirection, but what the heck could it be? > Making Harry reevaluate his image of his father? We just had that > with the Pensieve scene in OOP. In fact, that scene would've been > the perfect opportunity to spring the surprise on us, and the fact > that JRK didn't indicates to me that she's never going to. Having > shown us James as an arrogant, bullying jerk, throwing in "Oh, and > he wasn't a Gryffindor, either" two books later would be repetetive > and anticlimactic, IMO. > Hermowninny wrote: You make a good point about it being somewhat anticlimactic. And I can't think of how that could be revealed to further the plot. But I'm sure if JKR wanted to, she could. I have read MANY theories as to how the story will develop from here, and I think all (well, most) are possible. I also think it's possible that JKR is planning something that none of us has thought of. I still think she's being secretive about this for a reason: either to reveal his house as something other than Gryffindor or as a red herring so that those of us with too much time on our hands can debate these oh-so-important issues. All I can really say at this point is "We'll see." -Hermowninny From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 04:31:03 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:31:03 -0000 Subject: Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Lucius Malfoy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84755 Steve wrote > James and his friends (who are never called The Marauders in the > book, by the way...talk about contamination!) are or would be about > 36 years old in book five. Lucius Malfoy is 41. > > Steve Vander Ark > The Harry Potter Lexicon If the book hasn't referred to them as "the Marauders", then we took the name Marauders from the "Marauder's Map". Since it was their map, most of us would assume that they were "the Marauders"? Yolanda From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 02:25:25 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 02:25:25 -0000 Subject: Ogg the Gamekeeper In-Reply-To: <14e.266033c3.2ce2d47b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84756 > Carol wrote: > > ? But if so, why bring Ogg up at all? Tonks: > I think the purpose in bringing up Ogg has yet to be fully explained. > However, it was important for us to understand who trained Hagrid at > his post of gamekeeper. We don't know a lot about Ogg, but then, for > a long time we didn't know much about Mundungus or Mrs. Figg. I think > this may be one of those names we see again. You're probably right, since JKR seldom drops names casually. Ogg doesn't sound like a wizard's name to me. Maybe he was another half-blood of some sort. It sounds about as human as Grawp. But I'm just guessing, and was actually more concerned with Mrs. Weasley's age than with Grawp himself. (Oops! Ogg, I mean.) I don't see how she could have been to school before Hagrid's time, and I'm not sure that the apprentice explanation fully solves that problem. Carol From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 05:03:46 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:03:46 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84757 YolandaCarrol wrote: > Harry didn't chose Gryffindor. The Sorting Hat did. > > The whole point of the Sorting Hat is to determine > what house you would do best in. > > You do *not* get to chose what house you go in. > Remember in PS/SS, Draco bragging that his whole > family had been in Slytherin, so that he was sure > to go there. > > Draco also mentioned how Hufflepuff was the worst > and that if he was sorted into Hufflepuff he'd > leave Hogwarts. > > If Draco could simply chose to be in Slytherin > that whole conversation makes no sense. > > Back to Harry's sorting... > The Hat made several comments about Harry that > showed he could have done well in different > houses. For example, "not a bad mind" would > suggest Ravenclaw. > > Harry's "thirst to prove himself" is what > prompted the Sorting Hat to say "You would do > well in Slytherin." When Harry says, > "Not Slytherin", the hat then puts Harry in > it's second choice for him "Gryffindor". Hermowninny: Perhaps the sorting hat simply puts you into the house you really want to go in. From the mirror of erised, we see that it is possible for inanimate object to detect what you want. Draco obviously *really* wanted to be in Slytherin. He was put there. Ron *really* wanted to be put in Gryffindor. He was put there. Perhaps the conversation the sorting hat had with Harry was just the hat's way of making sure that Harry was certain where he wanted to go. I can see certain people wanting to be in Slytherin, others wanting to be in Gryffindor, other wanting to be in Ravenclaw. I can't see anyone wanting to be in Hufflepuff, but maybe that's where the sorting hat puts those who can't decide themselves. Didn't Hermione mention that the sorting hat considered putting her in Ravenclaw? Can't remember where I heard that. She has the qualities to be a Ravenclaw, but maybe from reading "Hogwarts-A History" she decided she wanted to be in Gryffindor. The sorting hat had a brief conversation with her (as it did with Harry) just to be sure she was certain and then went with Hermoine's choice. What if the sorting hat doesn't really sort you by your abilities, but confirms your choice. After all, the quote from Dumbledore about your choices determining who you are more than your abilities comes right after Harry tells Dumbledore that the hat wanted to put him in Slytherin. In reference to your comments above... Draco's comments about the sorting would make perfect sense if the students didn't know how the sorting hat worked. Perhaps even the teachers don't know. Perhaps only the four founders know exactly what the sorting hat is programmed to do. Okay, I don't know if I believe this myself. But, tell me, is it possible? -Hermowninny From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Wed Nov 12 04:58:57 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2003 22:58:57 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Lucius Malfoy References: Message-ID: <005f01c3a8d9$afcfb2e0$23d21e43@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84758 > Yolanda > If the book hasn't referred to them as "the Marauders", then we took > the name Marauders from the "Marauder's Map". > > Since it was their map, most of us would assume that they were "the > Marauders"? > Iggy here: Not necessarily. It could just be that they named it such because it was designed to be used by those who have deeds that break the rules and are up to mischief... which, ultimately, is what a marauder is. Also, if they were known as the Marauders in school, then it would be easy for anyone who possessed the map and knew how to activate it to identify who made it. As we all have learned already, so far as JKR is concerned at least, never assume anything. (Actually, there's an old saying that goes: When you assume, you make an "ass" of "u" and "me".) Iggy McSnurd From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 05:07:15 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:07:15 -0000 Subject: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84759 Jennifer wrote: > Does anyone have any suspicions to how Lily's or James' parents > died. I know JKR has not made this an issue but maybe > Harry's grandparents' history will have some light shed on it, or > Petunia will hold the key or spill the beans. >>> Your idea that Petunia holds the key (at least to the deaths of her own parents) is very interesting. Maybe that's how she learned what dementors are (and the "awful boy" explanation is just a cover up)? Carol From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Nov 12 05:19:35 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:19:35 -0000 Subject: Incursions into Privet Drive Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84760 Thinking again about the protection offered at Privet Drive, and whether Harry is really safe there now. Has the protection reached critical mass at this point, and the risks are beginning to outweigh the benefits? Obviously when Voldemort was Vapormort, and the most loyal DE's were incarcerated at Azkaban, the protection held up very nicely. But now . >From the discussion with Dumbledore at the end of OOTP, it seems that Harry must actually be in the house for the protection to work. Dumbledore says, "While you can still call home the place where your mother's blood dwells, there you cannot be touched or harmed by Voldemort She {Petunia} knows allowing you houseroom may well have kept you alive for the past 15 years." (OOTP, US, chap. 37, p. 836). That would imply that all the time Harry is cruising around Magnolia Crescent he is in danger, yes? I'm not clear on this part, exactly how far the "protection" extends. There is additional canon that the protection is only in the house, since both Arthur and Sirius insist Harry stay in the house after the Dementor attack, and Petunia/Vernon then lock Harry in his room. Regardless of the exact boundaries, we know the protection is *only* from Voldemort, given DD's statement above. Incursions into Privet Drive are a staple now during Harry's summers. Dobby and the Advance Guard were able to enter the home with seemingly minimal effort. We don't know Dobby apparated in, but do know he apparated out . We don't know for certain the Advance Guard apparated either, but it seems likely. Harry asks Lupin, "How're we getting?wherever we're going?" and Lupin responds, "Brooms. Only Way. You're too young to apparate." (OOTP, US, chap. 3, p. 51). Then most ominously, Arthur illegally connects the house to the floo network in GOF (that action made me very uncomfortable, anyone else?). Do these incursions imply other protections in place, ones that can be lifted for the 'good guys'? Voldemort does say, "But how to get to Harry Potter? For he has been better protected than I think even he knows, protected in *ways* {emphasis mine} devised by Dumbledore long ago, when it fell to him to arrange the boy's future." (GOF, US, chap. 33, p. 657). "Ways" plural implies more than one type of protection, but that wouldn't explain how Dobby entered Privet Drive. If there were other protections, they wouldn't be lifted for Dobby to convince Harry not to go to Hogwarts, or incite Harry to use magic (Guilty!Dumbledore proponents aside ). So, that leaves the option that the blood protection is the only protection, and Harry must be confined to the house for this protection to work. Yet, the house is easily accessible to anyone but Voldemort. Harry apparently sees the flaws inherent in the system: "I think he thought you were safest with the Muggles--" Ron began. "Yeah?" said Harry, raising his eyebrows. Have either of you been attacked by dementors this summer?" (OOTP, chap. 4, p. 63). Of course, I guess the whole idea is 'no place is safe' when Voldemort is around, and Privet Drive is just the latest to join the list. Hogwarts seems to be the last remaining bastion, and there's been a slow erosion of protection there as well. But that's another post ;). From steve at hp-lexicon.org Wed Nov 12 05:22:25 2003 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:22:25 -0000 Subject: Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Lucius Malfoy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84761 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yolandacarroll" > > If the book hasn't referred to them as "the Marauders", then we took > the name Marauders from the "Marauder's Map". > > Since it was their map, most of us would assume that they were "the > Marauders"? The map is called The Marauder's Map. That's singular. It refers to one person, whomever happens to be using the map to "maraud." If it was intended to refer to the four, it would be called The Marauders' Map. The whole "Marauders" thing is purely a fan invention...but a darn useful one, don't get me wrong. It's handy to have an easy term to call that group. By the same token, Harry Ron and Hermione are often refered to as The Trio. That isn't from the books either, but it's also darn handy. Steve Vander Ark The Harry Potter Lexicon From smaragdina5 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 05:29:12 2003 From: smaragdina5 at yahoo.com (smaragdina5) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:29:12 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84762 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > > I think JKR recognized that she was talking to a very young > reader who couldn't really process the idea that Snape wasn't as > bad as Harry had thought him. > > I remember reading a George Lucas interview where he said > that kids younger than six or so don't really understand how > Darth Vader and Annakin Skywalker are the same character; they > perceive them as two different people. > Interesting. This must be because younger children do not understand transformations: put on a monster costume, and it scares them, or pour water from a bowl into a glass, and they think there is more water in the glass because it is taller. This is why preschools often strive to have sand tables, water tables, or playdoh tables for the children to practice understanding transformations. But let me not go off topic. I can wrap it up by reminding us how even adults have residue and vestiges of this sort of earlier thinking (and others), such as how we have trouble realizing that someone has changed or that something is not how we are used to perceiving it. JKR has been using this to advantage, with all the surprises... smaragdina5 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 05:22:34 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:22:34 -0000 Subject: Of course Snape is a Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84763 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yolandacarroll" wrote: > Carol wrote: > > (Snip) > > He wouldn't have called Lily a "mud blood" if > > his own heritage were questionable. I do think > > (Snip) > > Jazmyn wrote: > > Voldemort calls people mudbloods all the time > > and he is not a pureblood. > > I believe Voldemort is impersonating a pureblood. > Would so many purebloods, > especially fanatically ones like Sirius' Mom > have done so if they thought he was a half-blood? > > Remember that Voldemort changed his name > and his appearance. He even comments on how he > had had no intention of keeping his muggle father's > name. > > I'll now go back to Snape. Everyone knows that > he is whatever he is. His Slytherin housemates > would definately know who's pure and who's not. > So unlike Voldemort, Snape can't yell "mudblood" > and hope people will think he's something else. > They already know what his real parentage is. > > Yelling "mudblood" works for Voldemort, but not Snape. > > Yolanda If you mean that Snape must be a "pure blood" because he couldn't have impersonated one as Voldemort did, I agree completely. He seems to have come from a line of dark wizards given the glimpse we receive of his cruel father and the fact that he knew more curses than most seventh years when he entered Hogwarts as a child of eleven. His mother, who seems terrified of his father, may have been a squib, but I doubt it. In any case, it's extremely unlikely that she was a muggle. Carol From nibleswik at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 05:32:24 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:32:24 -0000 Subject: Tur-bans or Too-Much (was Re: Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84764 > > > To begin with, I want to know what she [Rowling] meant by saying > (in answer to > > > why she made Quirrell rather than Snape the villain in SS/PS), "I > > > know all about Snape and he'd never put on a turban." Mschelle in Au: I think JKR's comment above was more a general humorous > > observation . Carol again: > Well, okay. But my point is that "Snape wouldn't wear a turban" is a > strange response to "Why did you make Quirrell the villain (in SS/PS) > instead of Snape?" I think she wanted to get around the question so we > wouldn't know whether Snape is a villain or not . Me: I think that was her way of saying, "Ask a stupid question, and you'll get a stupid answer." I mean, honestly! Why didn't you make Snape the villain instead of Quirrell? Because a) that would have been dreadfully dull and predictable and b) he has a major role in the books. On another level, though, I do understand that one just gets to know one's characters -- I've said the same thing about many of mine. Snape really wouldn't wear a turban. I believe it was you, Carol, who said he'd be more likely to wear a hooded cape. I totally agree with that, except that he'd need some way of ensuring that the hood would never fall down. I also REALLY don't think Snape's going to be a bad guy. I mean, building it up with the Trio going, "He's a bad guy! He is! He has to be! What? He's not? Oh, but he REALLY has to be this time. He's still not? Hmm. Is he this time? No, no he's still not evil. Guess he's not evil. Yeah, he's not evil in this book either. The guy's just a bastard, then? Yup yup. WHAT?! He's evil?! Aaaaaaaah! [World collapses]" Cheekyweebisom, who is becoming more and more inarticulate From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 12 05:41:12 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:41:12 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ogg the Gamekeeper Message-ID: <12f.34caa08a.2ce321f8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84765 Hello justcarol67 at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? You're probably right, since JKR seldom drops names ? casually. Ogg doesn't sound like a wizard's name to ? me. Maybe he was another half-blood of some sort. It ? sounds about as human as Grawp. But I'm just ? guessing, and was actually more concerned with Mrs. ? Weasley's age than with Grawp himself. (Oops! Ogg, I ? mean.) I don't see how she could have been to school ? before Hagrid's time, and I'm not sure that the ? apprentice explanation fully solves that problem. Last spring ( around May, I think?) we discussed Molly's age extensively. There was always disagreement, but the general consensus was that Molly was around 60. ( I am still not convinced of this). What we do know is that Voldemort and Hagrid were at school. If Ogg was gamekeeper then, and Molly knows of Ogg, she could well be sixty five by now because of Voldemort and Hagrid being at school together fifty years ago. There is obviously some time lacking in Hagrid's timeline. JKR has yet to fully explain much about Hagrid's pre-gamekeeper days which lie between his expulsion and become the fully fledged gamekeeper. However, there is still the fact that Hagrid, being just an apprentice and not a paid staff member, might not have shown himself to students as he did once he became gamekeeper, thus, Molly could be much younger than was thought. ( The gamekeeper doesn't seem to be a post that most people see often-- remember the Trio sought him out because he had come to fetch Harry and became his first wizarding friend. I doubt if Hagrid had not been set to this job of fetching Harry that he would have become such a major target for the Slytherins until he had become a professor) There are a few ages Molly could be because of the lack of clarity in canon, but that might be for a reason. As we have learned, JKR rarely does anything without a reason. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zanelupin at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 05:53:40 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:53:40 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Chapter Five In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84766 Pippin asks: >>3. We've been given to understand that the shrewd and cunning goblins are nobody's fools, not easily subjected to jinxes, tricks or blackmail. Yet Lupin thinks they will be tempted to join Voldemort even though they know he has murdered their kind. Why?<< Meri: >I am pretty sure (my copy of OotP is still out on loan) that it was Bill who said that if the goblins can be convinced that LV and the DEs are willing to offer them freedoms that the MoM has been denying them for years that this may prove an enticing (and understandably so) offer. The goblins seem to have a tendency to revolt against the MoM, as we have seen in all the goblin rebellions that Professor Binns bores the students with.< KathyK: Bill gives the answer as to why the goblins might be tempted. ***** Mr. Weasley asks: "Have you still not had any luck with Ragnok, Bill?" Bill responds: "He's feeling pretty anti-wizard at the moment," said Bill. "He hasn't stopped raging about the Bagman business, he reckons the Ministry did a cover-up, those goblins never got their gold from him, you know-" ***** And back to KathyK: The Goblins have little love for or trust in the current wizard government, according to the above exchange. And, as Meri pointed out, they have a long, bloody history with the Ministry. Combined wiht what Lupin (yes, it was Lupin) points out about being denied freedoms, it can be inferred that the Goblins still do not have the best of relationships with the human magical community. Even if they're too smart to fall for a line about freedom coming from another wizard (Voldemort), perhaps the Goblins see aiding LV in his quest for power as an opportunity to bring about some of their own changes. And it's not like they're going in empty handed. They have a massive amount of power and leverage in their own right as they operate "Just the one" wizard bank (SS, US paperback 63). So, IMO, if Voldemort did strike up a deal with them, he'd have to be honest and make a real effort in order to convince them rather than just paying lip service to get what he wants. And then what would stop the Goblins from defecting? Meri: >What I was surprised about was why Sirius didn't take this opportunity to use the housecleaning as a sort of exorcism to get out the bad vibes. Maybe then he would have been slightly happier (or more comfortable anyway) staying confined there.< KathyK: I really like Sirius and I understand how he must have been feeling back in that hateful house again. And I would have loved to see him in a better mood in the book. But I don't think it would have fit. Another listee said to me that Sirius wanted the "pity party." He wanted to pity himself for the position he was in. And in that sense he was completely inconsolable, and didn't want to be rescued from his funk. I also don't think he's one to take a healthy approach to the situation, like the one Meri described above, where he could view cleaning as purging himself and the house of all the nasty memories. I think this made more sense before I tried to write it down, but there you go, KathyK From darkthirty at shaw.ca Wed Nov 12 06:06:22 2003 From: darkthirty at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 06:06:22 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? and SHIP: Hr, GW, LL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84767 Hermowninny: > What if the sorting hat doesn't really sort you by your abilities, > but confirms your choice. After all, the quote from Dumbledore about > your choices determining who you are more than your abilities comes > right after Harry tells Dumbledore that the hat wanted to put him in > Slytherin. > > In reference to your comments above... Draco's comments about the > sorting would make perfect sense if the students didn't know how the > sorting hat worked. Perhaps even the teachers don't know. Perhaps > only the four founders know exactly what the sorting hat is > programmed to do. Dan: The corollary of this is then that the "other" house considered is also part of the particular student's "desire," and there's nothing that says that other, more hidden desire isn't, or won't be, in fact, the stronger one, at some point in the course of school, or even at the moment of sorting. There are different ways of dealing with inner dualities - and anyway, the house system is a bit of a simplification, yunno. Some might be quite accepting of inner dualities, or pluralisms, even, others might feel threatened. Of course, the idea of being taken over by some secret desire, or secretly by some other, is addressed symbolically in the series anyway, in every book, at the core of each book, in fact. (LV/Quirrell, TR/GW, animaguses and wrongful imprisonment and polyjuice and the "double" duo, Moody/Crouch Jr., LV/HP) Some have suggested Loony's Lion hat is somehow thematically related to the idea of student's moving toward other houses. At Scarhead's revisit, the hat confirms it's ideas regarding Scarhead, though, of course, Scarhead does eventually pull GG's sword out of it, which is strange, even in the witchwizard world. Did Buzzy (my nick for Albus) stow it in there, or did Godric (or one of the other founders) hack it up? As for SHIPPING Scarhead - I agree he's going to die (in some fashion) and be tragically alone and all that. No Shire for Scarhead. He will get out of the closet, however. Nevertheless, though he loves Granger (the Granger inside, the writer JKR?), and though pity for the other is hardly the way to begin romance (the pity is moved aside, thankfully), I still hold out for a slowly flowering, and awfully tragic, relationship with Loony, who I consider to be, in fact, the only other RW character in the book, besides Scarhead. Scarhead's held a little too precious in some ways, which the affect in OOP didn't effect. From dicentra at xmission.com Wed Nov 12 06:47:59 2003 From: dicentra at xmission.com (Dicentra spectabilis) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 06:47:59 -0000 Subject: Politics and Swearing in HP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84768 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nibleswik" wrote: > I may have been seeing politics where there was just storytelling, > but to me (and many of my friends, and, I'm sure, many on this > list), the Grand Inquisitorial Decrees just reeked of the Patriot > Act. > I was positively maniacal in my giggles as > the MoM appeared to act more and more like the Bush administration. > Now, a large part of this (who knows? maybe all of it) may have > been that I was allowing my political views to get the better of me > and falling into the common trap of, "See? This brilliant author > agrees with me!" I didn't think I was doing so, but it's definitely > possible. Given that JKR devised the plot of the entire 7-book series before 1997, I think it's safe to say that she's not parodying the Bush administration or any part thereof in Book 5. Furthermore, as a British author, I don't think that commenting on U.S. politics is uppermost in her mind. The HP series deals with The Big Issues Of Life, and therefore tends to address general principles rather than particulars. Her depiction of the MoM, the Educational Decrees, and Umbridge encompass a particular pattern of human behavior that crops up from time to time in every civilization. The MoM is in denial mode; therefore, you will likely associate any RL organization that you perceive to be in denial with the MoM. That doesn't mean that your evaluation of the RL organization is accurate or inaccurate (it's all a matter of perception, anyway) nor that the author is drawing specific parallels. I did not associate the MoM with any particular RL organization, for example, but I did recognize the behavior as something that is likely to occur in human societies. > I'm occasionally irked by the almost complete absence of swearing, > though, as it seems unrealistic to me. I know one (one!) teenager > who swears as infrequently and mildly as the Harry Potter kids. Though she usually avoids the actual expletives, she does mention that people swear. For example, "Ron swore," or "Ron said something that made Hermione say, 'Ron!'" Personally, I prefer this method: if you dig expletives, you can fill in the blank yourself, or if you don't, you won't be offended by the strong language. It accommodates more people that way. --Dicentra, in whose corner of the woods swearing is less common than in the general society ::dons her Elf identity:: Please remember that although it is permissable to discuss whether JKR is advancing political ideas and which ones they might be, it's probably not a good idea to comment on current political events such as the Bush administration. If a flame war erupts over political issues (and we fervently hope that it won't), the Elves will have to extinguish it with a steady stream of pumpkin juice and couple of well-placed Howlers. --Dicey Elf From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 12 07:18:48 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 07:18:48 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84769 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says Because, as he modestly and adorably points out in SS, he's "...just Harry". He didn't actually *do* anything to defeat Voldemort before he arrived at Hogwarts; he simply "lived". In the first four books, he's a scrawny little four-eyed geek who keeps getting slapped upside the head by life. Then he adolesces, and it's not pretty. The WW has been ripped off. They signed up for a bold, stalwart St. George of a Gryffindor. Instead they get this ratty looking kid in welfare glasses, Forrest Gump with a wand. Not to mention the fact that people tried to suck up to him in the beginning and he blew them off. --JDR From sydpad at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 08:39:02 2003 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 08:39:02 -0000 Subject: Get yer piping hot Snape Theory right here... Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84770 I'd thought I'd float this theory over here, it's been noodling around my head for a while. (sorry this isn't in Theory Bay format, I get exhausted just READING those brilliantly crafted posts! I might throw in some boat metaphors though:) ) If there was one thing that really took me aback in OoP, it was this: that Snape really DID want the DADA job, in fact applied for it every year, and that Dumbledore kept turning him down. I had been cozily confident that the rumour was just that, a rumour, and at some point someone would say, "Goodness, where did you get that idea? Dumbledore BEGS Snape to teach DADA, and he won't do it." Mostly due to the way that the information was presented, as casual gossip by Percy of all people, I'd have thought you'd have to pry Snape out of his beloved Potions dungeon with a crowbar. So now I've been sitting in my rapidly-flooding deinflated dingy, casting about for a new craft to stay afloat in (Syd eyes her metaphor dubiously, but presses on). I listened avidly to the webcast of the Albert Hall reading, and found the answer to the question, "Why won't D-dore let Snape teach DADA" intriguing and puzzling. JKR hemmed and hawed, then said it would be a spoiler, then said that Dumbledore feared it would bring out the worst in Snape, so he started him in Potions to see how he got on. Now the most obvious and simple explanation is the 'recovering alcoholic' one, that Dumbledore fears that if Snape taught DADA classes, that he would regain his taste for Evil and, well, go nuts or whatever. Or that he would abuse his students with hexes or some such thing. Like any obvious and simple explanation, this doesn't actually work very well. First off, why would that be a spoiler? Everyone knows Snape is a bit of an evil bastard. Anyhow, it's DEFENSE against the Dark Arts. The main temptation Snape would be faced with it seems, it textbooks on Hinkypunks. If Dumbledore is worried about the students safety, isn't letting Snape mess around with poisons and mind-altering potions with them kind of on the same level? And how could Snape possibly be worse than Umbrige or Lockhart? But mostly, it's this: "I trust Severus Snape" is simply imcompatible with "But I'm worried that if I let him near a 'Ridiculus' spell, he'll freak out and rejoin Voldemort." Whatever Snape is doing right now for the Order, it MUST involve exposure to the Dark Arts. If he's spying, then, geez, talk about your temptations. It's like trusting someone to infiltrate a ring of dealers, but not to teach an anti-drug seminar. If he's NOT spying, it's hard to believe that if he's "out there risking his life" (Sirius' words), he's not in some sort of contact with hostile forces, either fighting them or talking to them. So, 90% chance, Snape is PRACTICING Defence against the Dark Arts. What is it about teaching it to a bunch of teenagers specifically that worried Dumbledore? So here's My Theory: the problem isn't with the Dark Arts. It's with the position of Dark Arts teacher, or to be precise, the Jinx. Now the jinx is a rumour, but then, so was Snape wanting the job. There has been a rather... extreme range of bad luck befalling those unfortunate guys. I'm prepared to believe in the jinx-- let's say, it's something as simple as, "no one can hold this job for more than a year." It is my opinion that whatever it is in life that Snape wants, it is NOT teaching grade school. I think he's there because Dumbledore asked him to at the end of the war-- because he was hard-pressed for a head of Slytherin, and because he was worried about what would become of Snape. So let's say he goes to Snape and says, "Well, my little ray of sunshine, do an old man (to whom, ahem, you owe your life and liberty) a favour and come back to Hogwarts." Let's say Snape is not willing to refuse Dumbledore anything he might ask, but, wow, that doesn't really sound like his idea of fun. So, Slytherin that he is, he sneakily places the jinx on the job he immediately assumed he'll be offered: Defence against Dark Arts, what he was famous for at school. That way, he'll HAVE to leave, and if he leaves messy, well, who cares? But Dumbledore, super-sneaky guy that HE is, fakes him out and puts him in Potions instead. So now Snape is stuck-- bound by his duty to Dumbledore. Every year, he asks for the DADA job as a way of saying, "NOW can I leave?". The second he gets the job it's only a year till he can be out of there like a bat out of hell, if I may borrow the expression from Slick over at Sugarquill (who for some reason won't acknowledge co-authorship of this majestic theory ;) ). So what did Rowling mean by "bringing out the worst in Snape"? That depends on what you think 'the worst' in Snape is. For the above reasons, I think the 'alcoholic' analogy just doesn't wash. And if Dumbledore worried about Snape's cruelty, you'd think he'd have done something about his standard-issue teaching methods. No, I think we have not yet found out what the worst in Snape really is. I'm a root-causes sort of person, and I believe the root of Snape's cruelty is his self-destructiveness. I think he's someone prone to despair, and Dumbledore is quite right to worry about what would become of him if he left Hogwarts. To be blunt, I think Dumbledore is worried that if released of his duty to Hogwarts, Snape would walk up to Lucius Malfoy at the next Death Eater jamboree and say, "Guess what, genius-- turns out I really WAS spying for Dumbledore. You guys want a piece of me?" Well, that's my theory. Okay, it's more of a plank with a hankerchief nailed up to it, but it awaits you canon fire... Sydney From abigailnus at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 09:01:23 2003 From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:01:23 -0000 Subject: The Polyjuice Incident and House Identification In-Reply-To: <00a901c3a8c6$deea64c0$4e570043@hppav> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84771 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Eric Oppen" wrote: > One possible explanation for Ron and Harry's mistake with the Ravenclaw girl > when they, having Polyjuiced themselves into the image of the > Stones-that-Speak to gain entry into the Slytherins' sanctum, was that they > saw her from the back...and whatever House badges, emblems, and so on > Hogwarts may have are on the _front_ of the robes. > So-o-o, I think it's perfectly possible for there to be House emblems (as > there were in the Celluloid Thingy That Must Not Be Mentioned On This List) > and for Harry and Ron to not have been able to tell a Ravenclaw they didn't > know from a Slytherin, when she was seen from the back. Or perhaps a simpler solution is that the Ravenclaw girl is Penelope Clearwater - remember, Harry and Ron meet Percy only a few minutes later, and Ron is startled enough to ask him why he's in that part of the castle. As I understand it, Percy's supposed to be the red herring in CoS, and I suppose his presence in an area he wouldn't normally be frequenting might cause suspicion (I never caught that bit with Percy myself) but what's really going on is that he's had an assignation with his girlfriend. I think that's why JKR went to the trouble of placing the girl there and of mentioning to us that she's a Ravenclaw - just her way of making sure all the pieces are in place once the truth about Percy is revealed. Possibly the presence of Ravenclaws in that corridor would have been as unusual as that of Gryffindors, which is why the boys expected her to be a Slytherin. Also, it's funny. Abigail Who wonders whatever happened to Penelope Clearwater From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 07:45:56 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 07:45:56 -0000 Subject: Hagrid Apparated? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84772 > Hermowninny: > > > Forgive me for not knowing, but when did Hagrid apparate? > K: > > Well I don't know if this is what she meant but at the beginning > of PS he seems to arrive at the rocky island the Dursleys are hiding > on without a boat (at least he uses theirs to leave). >>> psychobirdgirl again: > > What I meant was, in the post I was replying to someone said that > Hagrid's sudden disappearance at the train station was attributed to > or most likely caused by disapparition. I thought that that was > highly unlikely also and was wondering if there was something to it. Geoff: Two things. First, re the station, can I refer you back to my message 84656? Second, back to canon: "The boat Uncle Vernon had hired was still there, with a lot of water in the bottom after the storm. 'How did you get here?' Harry asked, looking around for another boat. 'Flew,' said Hagrid. 'Flew?' 'Yeah - but we'll go back in this.....'" PS UK edition p, 50-51 From Jpcfaith at aol.com Wed Nov 12 07:01:41 2003 From: Jpcfaith at aol.com (hypatia423) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 07:01:41 -0000 Subject: The Importance of Luna Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84773 Luna and Harry both have been the target of their classmates. Maybe they find her unruffled calm disturbing. She certainly doesn't seem to display the typical "need to fit in" of young teenagers. She has an unusual degree of serenity and self confidence, not to mention brains as she's in Ravenclaw. All that might just be a bit intimidating to her peers. So now she and Harry have two fairly significant shared experiences; loss of parents/guardian, and ridicule by peers who are threatened by what they don't possess or don't understand.While I don't see a romantic liaison between them, I do think Luna is going to be Very Important as a friend, teacher, advisor to Harry. Her steadfast belief in things that there are absolutely no proof of is brought up numerous times (heliopaths, Crumple-Horned Snorkacks, the voices behind the veil). It makes me think this particular issue is highly significant. Although initially Harry seems to find her support questionable and indeed embarrassing (recalling the radish earrings),JKR seems to be slowly but surely building her credibility. The fact that Luna was part of the battle at the Ministry I think supports this. The same could be said for Neville. She's quietly courageous in a number of ways. I suspect we are going to see more of this courage. hypatia (pardon me while I hoist my "Luna for President" flag) Hypatia From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 06:44:42 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 06:44:42 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Hr, GW, LL In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84774 Dan wrote: > > I still hold out for a slowly flowering, and > awfully tragic, relationship with Loony, who I consider to be, in > fact, the only other RW character in the book, besides Scarhead. > Scarhead's held a little too precious in some ways, which the affect > in OOP didn't effect. Dan, you've said several times that you think Luna is the only RW character besides Harry. What do you base that on? She doesn't seem at all Real World to me. (She sees Thestrals, senses the significance of the veil, etc.) Do you mean that she's familiar with death or that she's ostracized for being different? Can you clarify your thinking for me? Thanks, Carol (who wishes she were less RW) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 06:32:56 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 06:32:56 -0000 Subject: Ogg the Gamekeeper In-Reply-To: <12f.34caa08a.2ce321f8@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84775 I wrote: > > ? You're probably right, since JKR seldom drops names > ? casually. Ogg doesn't sound like a wizard's name to > ? me. Maybe he was another half-blood of some sort. It > ? sounds about as human as Grawp. But I'm just > ? guessing, and was actually more concerned with Mrs. > ? Weasley's age than with Grawp himself. (Oops! Ogg, I > ? mean.) I don't see how she could have been to school > ? before Hagrid's time, and I'm not sure that the > ? apprentice explanation fully solves that problem. > > Tonks wrote: Last spring ( around May, I think?) we discussed Molly's age extensively. > There was always disagreement, but the general consensus was that Molly was > around 60. ( I am still not convinced of this). What we do know is that Voldemort > and Hagrid were at school. If Ogg was gamekeeper then, and Molly knows of Ogg, > she could well be sixty five by now because of Voldemort and Hagrid being at > school together fifty years ago. ,snip> > > However, there is still the fact that Hagrid, being just an apprentice and > not a paid staff member, might not have shown himself to students as he did once > he became gamekeeper, thus, Molly could be much younger than was thought. ( > There are a few ages Molly could be because of the lack of clarity in canon, > but that might be for a reason. As we have learned, JKR rarely does anything > without a reason. > > -Tonks Sorry I didn't check the back posts. I'm a bit pressed for time. I still think it would be strange for Molly to be about 65 as the Ogg connection suggests. The descriptions of her make her sound middle-aged, say 45, and as I said before, unless there's something more to her character than we know about, she seems like the type who would marry early, and, as I didn't say, have a child about every 18 months to two years. (I like Molly. Please don't take this as criticism.) the only explanation I can think of that would reconcile Molly as we've seen her with Molly as a woman older than Voldemort is the idea that witches and wizards live longer, and by extension age more slowly, than muggles. JKR said in an interview that Dumbledore (who seems about 85) is 150 and MacGonagall (who seems about 55) is "a sprightly 70). If anyone can come up with a better explanation, I'd like to hear it. (Maybe you could just refer me to a particularly enlightening back post.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 06:20:43 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 06:20:43 -0000 Subject: Tur-bans or Too-Much (was Re: Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84776 > Carol: > > > > To begin with, I want to know what she [Rowling] meant by > saying > > (in answer to > > > > why she made Quirrell rather than Snape the villain in > SS/PS), "I > > > > know all about Snape and he'd never put on a turban." > > Mschelle in Au: > I think JKR's > comment above was more a general humorous > > > observation . > > Carol again: > > Well, okay. But my point is that "Snape wouldn't wear a turban" is > a > > strange response to "Why did you make Quirrell the villain (in > SS/PS) > > instead of Snape?" I think she wanted to get around the question > so we > > wouldn't know whether Snape is a villain or not . > > Me: > I think that was her way of saying, "Ask a stupid question, and > you'll get a stupid answer." I mean, honestly! Why didn't you make > Snape the villain instead of Quirrell? Because a) that would have > been dreadfully dull and predictable and b) he has a major role in > the books. Yes. that's what I expected her to say. But possibly it wasn't all that obvious at the time, since only the first book had come out. we have the advantage of 20/20 hindsight. On another level, though, I do understand that one just > gets to know one's characters -- I've said the same thing about many > of mine. Snape really wouldn't wear a turban. I believe it was you, > Carol, who said he'd be more likely to wear a hooded cape. I totally > agree with that, except that he'd need some way of ensuring that the > hood would never fall down. Nope, it wasn't me, though I agree that sweeping hooded cloaks are the perfect garment for Snape, who would find it a great deal harder to sweep and glide down the hallway in a suit and tie. > > I also REALLY don't think Snape's going to be a bad guy. I mean, > building it up with the Trio going, "He's a bad guy! He is! He has > to be! What? He's not? Oh, but he REALLY has to be this time. He's > still not? Hmm. Is he this time? No, no he's still not evil. Guess > he's not evil. Yeah, he's not evil in this book either. The guy's > just a bastard, then? Yup yup. WHAT?! He's evil?! Aaaaaaaah! [World > collapses]" > > Cheekyweebisom, who is becoming more and more inarticulate I agree, of course. He's mean to his students, but they learn what he teaches (with the possible exception of Neville, who will probably be a little less susceptible to sarcasm in Book 6), and he's doing something difficult and dangerous for the Order. I trust Dumbledore's judgment of him over Ron's. The fascinating thing about Snape is that the more JKR reveals about him, the denser the aura of mystery surrounding him becomes. (Yes, I know it's a faulty metaphor!) To return to my original question, I think the reason she didn't give a straight answer was that the question related to the first book and she didn't want to give anything away about Snape's role in CS, much less the later books. Nevertheless, if I'd been that questioner, I'd have responded with "Huh? What do you mean?" Come to think of it, though, I wouldn't have asked that question. Carol From HimemyaUtena at aol.com Wed Nov 12 05:50:42 2003 From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:50:42 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Of course Snape is a Slytherin Message-ID: <1de.12a267a7.2ce32432@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84777 Carol wrote: >>>Snip)He wouldn't have called Lily a "mud blood" if his own heritage were questionable. I do think>>(Snip) Jazmyn responded: >>Voldemort calls people mudbloods all the time and he is not a pureblood.> Yolanda chipped in: > I believe Voldemort is impersonating a pureblood. He may not acutally say it, but considering his stance on the issue how many people would take him for anything else.> Adrianna now writes: Okay, Voldemort is not pureblood. But he is also not a "mudblood". This term seems to be only used for people with both parents as muggles. It's used for Hermione, but never Harry, who is considered a halfblood. Which is something I never really understood. Both of his parents were magical. Yeah, Lily was muggleborn but I don't see how that makes Harry a halfblood, like, say, Tom Riddle. Second, it would seem that Yolanda's correct when she says people do not know that Voldemort is not pureblood, given Bellatrix's reaction when Harry tells her this information. Note though, that there's no reaction from Lucius, who is also prominantly featured in that scene. Adrianna [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From HimemyaUtena at aol.com Wed Nov 12 05:43:57 2003 From: HimemyaUtena at aol.com (HimemyaUtena at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 00:43:57 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor Message-ID: <24.490cd2df.2ce3229d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84778 Jen wrote: > James was in Gryffindor for one reason. I've said it before in a > previous post 83848, about Harry's true purpose and one of the > reasons why his father was in Gryffindor explains it. My belief is > that Harry is the Heir of Gryffindor and before Harry, so was James. > His family was well off because of their family, that was the basis > of Harry's inheritance. Because their family is related to Godric, > all of their decendents would be in Gryffindor naturally. When LV > came to kill Harry's parents, (in Godric Hollow btw) LV was not going > to kill Lily. LV only wanted James and Harry...why? Because they > are related to Godric Gryffindor the opposite of LV, who is the Heir > of Slytherin. LV wanted to eliminate any threat to him, I think being > heir to one of the most powerful wizards of the age has some > advantage and LV wanted to get rid of that. I always thought that LV > killed only James and Lily because they were part of the OoP and that > they were against him. Obviously that is not so. I may be wrong, but do we know that he *wanted* to kill James? It seems to me that he may have killed James because James was actively threatening him while trying to give Lily time to escape with Harry. Voldemort asked Lily to step aside, but perhaps she was not threatening him, only trying to protect Harry. I'm not trying to say that wouldn't kill someone if they weren't threatening him. There are numerous possibilities for why he may have not wanted to kill Lily. One I think, rather than trying to toss romantic interest into the mix (I don't think Voldemort has romantic interest in anyone), is that he doesn't want to kill her because she's a mother and maybe makes him think of his own mother. Yes, I realize that seems a bit absurd considering he's about to kill her son, but I dunno. Still think its a possibility. Anyway, back to what I was previously saying, I don't think it's necessarily true that Voldemort was targeting James. Adrianna From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 12 10:50:45 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:50:45 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84779 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jdr0918" wrote: > > The Sergeant Majorette says > > Because, as he modestly and adorably points out in SS, he's "...just > Harry". He didn't actually *do* anything to defeat Voldemort before > he arrived at Hogwarts; he simply "lived". In the first four books, > he's a scrawny little four-eyed geek who keeps getting slapped upside > the head by life. Then he adolesces, and it's not pretty. > > The WW has been ripped off. They signed up for a bold, stalwart St. > George of a Gryffindor. Instead they get this ratty looking kid in > welfare glasses, Forrest Gump with a wand. > Wonderful! I love it! The serpentine complexities of 5 books condensed into 8 lines. Can anyone else do better? I doubt it. I think that if the publishers were to take this and add a question mark or two it would make the ultimate book jacket blurb for book 6. If I were you, I'd copyright it immediately. Kneasy From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 11:14:41 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 03:14:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Avada Kedavra Meaning Message-ID: <20031112111441.41274.qmail@web40015.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84780 12Nov03 Hermowninny wrote: I know there's someone in the groups that can enlighten me as to the meaning of Avada Kedavra. Also, I'd really like to know where on the net I can look up latin meanings. Paula now: This term has also intrigued me from the very beginning. My personal theory is that the origin is from Hebrew. However, since the expression is written in Latin letters, it's difficult for me to tell exactly which root is being used in the word "avada". In the Hebrew alphabet, the first "a" could be one of two different letters, which would make a difference in the meaning. If we go with the first option, the root would be from the verb, "to lose". But, this verb can also have the meaning "to destroy". There's the additional problem with the fact that the conjugation or form is wrong here. Now if I had a little more initiative, I'd look up the Biblical usage because in the Bible, the conjugations do not always appear as they are used in Modern. The second option would be the root for the verbs "to work", "to adapt, process, arrange". OK, so on to the second word, a bit more simple, but not much. In Hebrew, it's actually two words. "Ke" is "as" or "like" (In Hebrew this word is considered a prefix and attached to the word.) In the Bible, the word "dever" (divra) is the word used for the plague or pestilence that was brought on the Egyptians when they didn't let the Israelites leave. However, this same root, "DVR" can also be translated as "words, things, matters". (A basic problem here is that in Hebrew there are no vowels and they really aren't needed, but that's another story...However, when Hebrew words are written in Latin letters, it can be misleading.) So, if my math is right, we have four possible translations of the phrase, "Avada Kedvara", and in the context of the HP series, I'd go with something like "Gotten Rid of like a Plague". Hope this hasn't been too confusing. ~Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 11:18:23 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:18:23 -0000 Subject: Heir of other houses In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84781 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hp_lexicon" wrote: Steve Vander Ark: > On the other hand, there weren't castles of any kind a thousand > years ago either. Rowling can do whatever she wants with her world. > On a point of information, both Windsor Castle and the Tower of London were built during the reign of William I (1066-87) which makes them perilously near being a thousand years old...... OK, they been added to since, but so probably has Hogwarts. From xmezumiiru at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 12:19:34 2003 From: xmezumiiru at yahoo.com (An'nai Jiriki) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 04:19:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Lucius Malfoy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031112121934.34105.qmail@web12203.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84782 --- yolandacarroll wrote: > Steve wrote > > James and his friends (who are never called The > Marauders in the > > book, by the way...talk about contamination!) are > or would be about > > 36 years old in book five. Lucius Malfoy is 41. > > Snip > If the book hasn't referred to them as "the > Marauders", then we took > the name Marauders from the "Marauder's Map". > > Since it was their map, most of us would assume that > they were "the > Marauders"? > > Yolanda > Snip I always thought the 'Marauder' of "Marauder's Map" meant the person using it. Hence, Harry would be the marauder in book 3, Fake!Moody in book 4, Fred and George pre-book 1, etc. Chris ===== "You irritate me. Kill me now." ~Javert, Les Miserables __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From pmah4600 at mail.usyd.edu.au Wed Nov 12 12:20:39 2003 From: pmah4600 at mail.usyd.edu.au (The Kirk) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:20:39 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84783 wrote: > Perhaps the sorting hat simply puts you into the house you really > want to go in. From the mirror of erised, we see that it is possible > for inanimate object to detect what you want. > > Draco obviously *really* wanted to be in Slytherin. He was put > there. Ron *really* wanted to be put in Gryffindor. He was put > there. > > Perhaps the conversation the sorting hat had with Harry was just the > hat's way of making sure that Harry was certain where he wanted to go. I think that when it comes to Sorting, the Hat does make its decision strongly on the desires of the student that's wearing it- it listened to Harry, and I bet when it "heard" Draco's wishes to be put in Slytherin, it complied. I think that it probably only ever makes its choice on something deeper when either the student really doesn't have much of a preference (perhaps someone like Luna?), or when they're Muggle-born, and don't know enough about the houses. Other times, I imagine it would very rarely go against the wishes of the person wearing it. This ties in with the theme of choice determining who you are, but also gives the Sorting Hat something to do, other than grant people wishes. Roo From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 11:50:30 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:50:30 -0000 Subject: Hagrid Apparated? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84784 Having typed message 84772 at about 7.45 this morning (despite its arrival time on HPFGU) two further thoughts ocurred to me since my brain shifted up a gear after breakfast..... (1) I have pondered on this in the past but never got as far as raising the question. Hagrid pinches the boat to get Harry and himself back to the mainland. What about the Dursleys? How did they get back? Does Hagrid send the boat back? This sounds like one of those logic puzzles: "There were five people on an island - an orphaned boy, a half-giant gamekeeper and an unpleasant family of three. They had a boat which could carry three at once.....etc....etc." :-) (2) This raises another matter about Hagrid. From the same area of PS: "'Be grateful if yeh didn't mention that ter anyone at Hogwarts,' he said.'I'm - er - not supposed ter do magic, strictly speaking'. I was allowed ter do a bit ter follow yeh an' get yer letters to yer an' stuff - one of the reasons I was so keen ter take on the job- '" UK edition 48) Presumably Dumbledore has some sort of arrangement with the illegal magic people to cover this. But - are they monitoring Hagrid? In addition to getting to Harry, he lights a fire, gives Dudley a pig's tail and uses magic to speed the boat up on the return journey and sounds a bit shifty about the latter - "'If I was ter - er -spedd things up a bit, would yer mind not mentioning it at Hogwarts?'" (Ditto p.51) He seems more worried about the school finding out rather than Mafalda Hopkirk and Co. Interesting? Geoff From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 20:35:05 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:35:05 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Why need more? References: <20031111192140.74496.qmail@web40508.mail.yahoo.com> <004501c3a89c$e92b4f00$f1f51d43@rick> Message-ID: <00e301c3a95c$74b5e930$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84785 > Iggy said: > > > She has still made sure he was taken care of (not in four-star quality, > but > > better than being in an orphanage...) > > Suzanne > I don't think you can assume that. I'd bet that if Harry had been raised in > an orphanage, he'd have had clothes that fit and I also suspect they'd have > fixed his glasses. I also imagine he'd have had more food to eat. > > Me (K) I agree with Suzanne, he might well have been better off in an orphanage. One of the main reasons statistics show that children do better in families than in care is because of the emotional needs that a family can meet but a care home really isn't equipped for. The Dursleys aren't exactly interested in meeting those needs. Also for the first 11 years of his life he had no friends because Dudley and his group of bullies used to scare people off. Either he would have been able to make friends in a home or, better yet (at least more amusing), he could have made friends with an older 'trouble' kid from the home who could have made the bullies think twice about picking on Harry. Of course the downside is that if he had manifested 'strange abilities' in a home they might have been more noticed and he might have been singled out/picked on for that. K From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Wed Nov 12 12:36:41 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:36:41 -0000 Subject: Snape and Harry (Re:Snape Theory right here...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84786 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sydney" wrote: (huge snip) I'm a root-causes sort of person, and I believe the root of > Snape's cruelty is his self-destructiveness. I think he's someone > prone to despair, and Dumbledore is quite right to worry about what > would become of him if he left Hogwarts. To be blunt, I think > Dumbledore is worried that if released of his duty to Hogwarts, > Snape would walk up to Lucius Malfoy at the next Death Eater > jamboree and say, "Guess what, genius-- turns out I really WAS > spying for Dumbledore. You guys want a piece of me?" > > Well, that's my theory. Okay, it's more of a plank with a > hankerchief nailed up to it, but it awaits you canon fire... > > Sydney No canon fire, Sidney! I think you pointed a very interesting aspect concerning Snape's personality. Moreover, if he really is self destructive, it makes him look like...Harry, who acts in a very similar way in OotP (when he tries to get into trouble with Dudley; when he provokes Umbridge's grief, when he doesn't want the others to help him, etc, etc). And by the way, look at what JKR wrote in GOF, in the Pensieve chapter: "Dumbledore placed his long hands on either side of the Pensieve and swirled it, rather as a gold prospector would swirl for fragments of gold... and Harry saw his own face changing smoothly into Snape's, who opened his mouth, and spoke to the ceiling, his voice echoing slightly. 'It's coming back... Karkaroff's too... stronger and clearer than ever...'" I always found this scene very enigmatic. Why did Harry change into Snape in Dumbledore's thoughts? Why does JKR associate their images with gold? Should we understand that both Snape and Harry are precious to Dumbledore; that Dumbledore loves Snape just the same way he loves Harry? Maybe he sees them as his spiritual sons. Or should we consider that there's a strong tie between Snape and Harry? Another time, the Pensieve shows the similitude. In OotP, it appears that 15 years- old Snape was physically very similar to Harry (they both look pinched and unhealthy; they both look sloppy; they both are given rough times). Does Snape hate Harry because he can recognize himself in the boy? And finally, we mustn't forget that they both have a strong tie with Voldemort, they both wear a physical mark he gave them. Voldemort, formerly known as Tom Riddle. Another strange boy, with strange ideas and a hard childhood. Dumbledore took interest in that boy too when he was still at Hogwarts. Dumbledore, Riddle/Voldemort, Snape, and then Harry. Do they compose a lineage? Not being "a Snape's expert",I'd like to know if this has been debated yet, and would be happy to read your comments. Amicalement, Iris From greatelderone at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 12:43:55 2003 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:43:55 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84787 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermowninny719" wrote: > Didn't Hermione mention that the sorting hat considered putting her > in Ravenclaw? Can't remember where I heard that. She has the > qualities to be a Ravenclaw, but maybe from reading "Hogwarts-A > History" she decided she wanted to be in Gryffindor. GEO Actually I recall in PS/SS, during the train to the school she says that she hopes to get into Gryffindor since all the best wizards like Dumbledore were sorted into it. > The sorting hat > had a brief conversation with her (as it did with Harry) just to be > sure she was certain and then went with Hermoine's choice. Or it dug that conversation out of her head and used it to determine her house. > What if the sorting hat doesn't really sort you by your abilities, > but confirms your choice. I agree. Afterall Rowling and the books are really big on free choice and will over pre-destination, class, genetics and all that other stuff. Afterall if it sorted people into their houses by their qualities then Harry would have been a Slytherin, Hermione a Ravenclaw and Neville a Hufflepuff. From maneelyfh at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 13:14:11 2003 From: maneelyfh at yahoo.com (maneelyfh) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 13:14:11 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84788 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermowninny719" wrote: > YolandaCarrol wrote: > > Harry didn't chose Gryffindor. The Sorting Hat did. > > > > The whole point of the Sorting Hat is to determine > > what house you would do best in. > > > > You do *not* get to chose what house you go in. > > Remember in PS/SS, Draco bragging that his whole > > family had been in Slytherin, so that he was sure > > to go there. >> > The Hat made several comments about Harry that > > showed he could have done well in different > > houses. For example, "not a bad mind" would > > suggest Ravenclaw. > > > > Harry's "thirst to prove himself" is what > > prompted the Sorting Hat to say "You would do > > well in Slytherin." When Harry says, > > "Not Slytherin", the hat then puts Harry in > > it's second choice for him "Gryffindor". > > Hermowninny: > Perhaps the sorting hat simply puts you into the house you really > want to go in. From the mirror of erised, we see that it is possible > for inanimate object to detect what you want. > If the sortiing hat does not decide the house you go into, then why have the cerenomy at all. Why not just let the students choose the house they want. It is the sorting hats job so to speak to evaluate a students ability and put them in the house they will do best in. IMHO all students have characteristics of all the houses, but certain ones are stronger and that strongest characteristic is the determining factor in which house you go to. AS for DD's comment about the choice you make....... is a charcter issue and indirectly related to what house you are sorted into. If Harry was the type of person to save his butt at all costs he probably would have been put into Slytherin but his strongest characteristic is bravery. It's just who he is as a person. Fran From vinnia_chrysshallie at yahoo.co.nz Wed Nov 12 13:41:42 2003 From: vinnia_chrysshallie at yahoo.co.nz (=?iso-8859-1?q?Vinnia?=) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:41:42 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031112134142.81744.qmail@web41215.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84789 Jennifer wrote: Does anyone have any suspicions to how Lily's or James' parents died. I know JKR has not made this an issue but maybe Harry's grandparents' history will have some light shed on it, or Petunia will hold the key or spill the beans. Me : I strongly suspect that one of Lily's parents is still alive. He(or she) could not take Harry in, because his(her)blood is only half of Lily's blood. Harry would probably get to meet Mr/Mrs. Evans in book 6/early book 7, through Mark Evans. As to why Petunia never mentioned her parents to Harry, well, I don't think she has been in contact with them since she left home. Petunia strikes me as someone who wants to be viewed as well off. If the Evans were on the poor side, Petunia would not want to have anything to do with them once she's rich. This would also explain why Petunia is so jealous of Lily. Imagine wanting to have the finest of everything, and your parents could not afford it, then your sister came home and said that they drank out of golden goblet at her school. I would be jealous too! Anyway, just my half-cent. Vinnia http://personals.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Personals New people, new possibilities. FREE for a limited time. From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 11:33:39 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 11:33:39 -0000 Subject: Politics and Swearing in HP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84790 > > I'm occasionally irked by the almost complete absence of swearing, > > though, as it seems unrealistic to me. I know one (one!) teenager > > who swears as infrequently and mildly as the Harry Potter kids. > Dicentra: > Though she usually avoids the actual expletives, she does mention > that people swear. For example, "Ron swore," or "Ron said something > that made Hermione say, 'Ron!'" Personally, I prefer this method: if > you dig expletives, you can fill in the blank yourself, or if you > don't, you won't be offended by the strong language. It accommodates > more people that way. > I came from an era and a background as a child where swearing just wasn't on. As a teacher, I often used to chide pupils who swore in my hearing by saying that I was surprised that they needed to use toilet words from a language which had been dead for 1000 years when I could make my dissatisfaction perfectly clear in modern English. That usually used to make my point in a humourous way. In my current involvement with a Boys' Club in our church which has about 30 boys aged 8-14, the level of swearing is fairly low when they are with us; maybe the church atmosphere ruhbs off because I have overheard naughty words flying outside the Club environment(!)..... In the books, we are often seeing Harry interacting with adults and he is probably a polite enough guy. With others like Ron and Hermione, his contact doesn't call for gratuitous bad language. I have commented somewhere in the past about Ron's over-use of a mild swear word in the films - especially in the hearing of Minerva McGonagall. From suzchiles at msn.com Wed Nov 12 13:50:20 2003 From: suzchiles at msn.com (Suzanne Chiles) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 05:50:20 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's Popularity References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84791 > > The Sergeant Majorette says > > The WW has been ripped off. They signed up for a bold, stalwart St. > > George of a Gryffindor. Instead they get this ratty looking kid in > > welfare glasses, Forrest Gump with a wand. > > Surely you're not implying that Harry is developmentally disabled? Suzanne From barrie1111 at juno.com Wed Nov 12 15:00:14 2003 From: barrie1111 at juno.com (katia112003) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:00:14 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Last name Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84793 I was reading _Fahrenheit_451_ by Ray Bradbury and saw that the man whom Montag meets (who introduces him to "the Book People") was named (probably last-name) Granger. Could this be where JKR got Hermione's last name? I thought it was funny that Granger is a walking library :) Just Musing, Katia, who has been a member of this group for six months, and finally decided to post. From annemehr at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 15:13:56 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:13:56 -0000 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re:_I_need_help,_s'il_vous_pla=EEt?= In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84794 Iris wrote, in a post I'd be willing to bet is perfectly appropriate for this board: > My current problem is that I have only the French translation > of "Quidditch through Ages", but I would like to know the exact > version of some sentences and expressions. So if you can help me, > thanks a lot! Here it is: > 1) In the preface by Dumbledore, I can read: ? Le Quidditch > nous a fait ?voluer autant que nous avons fait ?voluer le > Quidditch . ? The entire sentence (in my U.S. Scholastic version) reads: "As we have developed the game of Quidditch, so it has developed us; Quidditch unites witches and wizards from all walks of life, bringing us together to share moments of exhilaration, triumph, and (for those who support the Chudley Cannons) despair." > 2) In the French version, Bowman Right is "un habile > ensorceleur de m?taux", something like "a skilful/clever metal > charmer". What's the exact expression? It's "a skilled metal-charmer." > Thanks again, > > Amicalement, > > Iris You're very welcome! Annemehr From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Nov 12 15:14:24 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:14:24 -0000 Subject: How is a Person 'Chosen' to Hear a Prophecy? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84795 "For he {Harry} has been better protected than I think even he knows, protected in ways devised by Dumbledore long ago, *when it fell to him to arrange the boy's future*." {emphaisi mine} (Voldemort in GOF, US, chap. 33, p. 657). I used this quote in another post and was intrigued by the part, "fell to him to arrange the boy's future." Voldemort may not know the whole story, but assuming he does, I started thinking again about Dumbledore and the Prophecy. This seems the logical starting point for when the responsibility "fell" to Dumbledore, for he was involved in protecting Harry long before James and Lily died. What is the ethical responsibility of a person hearing a Prophecy? I firmly believe a person is chosen to hear a Prophecy based on their ability to take responsibility for the situation and make tough choices based on the "will" of the Prophecy rather than personal biases. A person can't just hear the thing and decide?"I don't like that outcome" and proceed to steer the course in another direction. Possibly, hearing a Prophecy even constitutes a binding magical contract, like a life debt. That would also mean people chosen to hear a prophecy must have certain ethical standards that jive with the intentions of what they hear. Harry unconciously assists in fulfilling the second Prophecy by granting mercy to Wormtail. Could we even say he's been chosen to hear the 2nd Prophecy *because* he holds the ethical standard that killing Wormtail would be wrong? I also think the fact that Dumbledore heard the first Prophecy is more evidence for his high ethical standards. Otherwise, if prophecies can be channeled to any old person, especially ones willing to interfere in matters of the metaphysical realm (? not sure what to call it), then what would be their purpose? From silmariel at telefonica.net Wed Nov 12 16:25:10 2003 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:25:10 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: asking the question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200311121725.10954.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 84796 > > Silmariel (me) wrote: > > ...the answer is not the Prank because I think it does > > not justify that intensity of hate when your enemy has been > > dead 14 years. To me, that's not a 'scar not to be healed', it > > is a scar you can heal or not, but depending on the person, not > > something so deep that it is Ever So Present after 14 years. Carol answered: > I think it's the humiliation of having been publicly hung > upsidedown with his dingy underwear showing. It would be very > hard to forgive or forget something like that, and the pain of > having the son of the person responsible witness it in the > Pensieve would be excruciating. Snape would think that Harry had > deliberately chosen to pry into his most painful memories. I > think that scar, in combination with one created by the Prank > (and the resulting life debt), will only heal when Snape has > saved Harry's life in some spectacular way that Harry openly and > gratefully acknowledges, probably near the end of Book 7. To wich I reply: That's not enough and would make him an inmature person. If he is not able to control a hate based on those two things, after James is dead, Lupin is a social pariah, and Sirius and Peter had been imprisoned alive (each in his own way) more than ten years, he shouldn't be able to be alive after being a double agent for so long time. If he is to jump and lose control on that, I don't know how Dumbledore can trust him a delicate task as spying is. Some scars are too deep to be healed, but public humiliation isn't that deep. It doesn't necessarily hurt after years and you don't need your enemy's son to heal that. If Snape isn't able to heal that, it's up to him, but it does not justify DDore excusing him, as he did with 'some scars run too deep to be healed' Snape's hate for James is prior to the Harry-Snape pensieve fight, and I'm not delving into that scene, only to say that for me, Snape's worst memory is not the pensieve scene. To me, Snape didn't lost control because of what Harry had seen, but because of what Harry was about to see if he kept looking. Would I lose control if a student discovered I was humilliated while young? No, I'm mature enough, I'd be angry but not to the point of trowing objects. Would I lose control if that same student had nearly witnessed how my son died? Probably. Even after 15 years? Yes. So the question remains. What happened to Snape that he is unable to forget? Silmariel From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 12 15:26:08 2003 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:26:08 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Awkward Squad, was: Re: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84797 "nibleswik" said: Though I most certainly will not abandon >my hopes that Draco will follow in Snape's footsteps, becoming the >brilliant, shrewd, good guy who can still be an asshole, I love what >you said. I don't see this. Not just because I don't think Draco will redeem, but because Draco lacks the wherewithal to follow in Snape's footsteps. Snape has a brilliant mind. He has above average abilities in two exacting fields (Potions and DADA), and there's evidence that he's an excellent dueler as well. He has a strong character, and is courageous. Draco isn't *any* of these things. The only thing he's good at, that we've seen, is Quiddich, and this would hardly be "following in Snape's footsteps." He doesn't have a strong character -- he's able to lead around a pack of high school students with the help of his high lineage and his two goons, but in any instance where these two things fail him -- such as any encounter with Harry where he's not backed up by Snape -- he's left in the dust. And he's a coward, like most bullies. Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Compare high-speed Internet plans, starting at $26.95. https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.) From grianne2 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 15:39:26 2003 From: grianne2 at yahoo.com (Annalisa Moretti) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:39:26 -0000 Subject: Another Theory was:Snape and Harry (Re:Snape Theory right here...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84798 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "iris_ft" wrote: Iris: > I always found this scene very enigmatic. Why did Harry change into > Snape in Dumbledore's thoughts? Why does JKR associate their images > with gold? > Should we understand that both Snape and Harry are precious to > Dumbledore; that Dumbledore loves Snape just the same way he loves > Harry? Maybe he sees them as his spiritual sons. > Or should we consider that there's a strong tie between Snape and > Harry? Another time, the Pensieve shows the similitude. In OotP, it > appears that 15 years- old Snape was physically very similar to > Harry (they both look pinched and unhealthy; they both look sloppy; > they both are given rough times). Does Snape hate Harry because he > can recognize himself in the boy? > And finally, we mustn't forget that they both have a strong tie with > Voldemort, they both wear a physical mark he gave them. Voldemort, > formerly known as Tom Riddle. Another strange boy, with strange > ideas and a hard childhood. Dumbledore took interest in that boy too > when he was still at > Hogwarts. > Dumbledore, Riddle/Voldemort, Snape, and then Harry. Do they compose > a lineage? Not being "a Snape's expert",I'd like to know if this has > been debated yet, and would be happy to read your comments. Annalisa: I actually have a theory percolating in my brain that's rather like this ... I was thinking of of posting it to TBAY (I even (almost) have an acronym for it!) but I've never posted to TBAY before so I was hesitant to do so. So I'll outline it here. Similar to what you've said, I detect a very close relationship between Dumbledore and Snape, almost father/son-like; even when Dumbledore rebuffs Snape, or teases him - for one thing, Snape puts up with it, which is very unlike him, and for another, despite the fact that Dumbledore disagrees with Snape so many times, he still seems to be very fond of him. Basically it's my theory that Snape and Dumbledore share a connection, as in a familial connection. That does not necessarily mean there is a blood link between the two of them -- though I don't rule that out -- but that Dumbledore knew Snape before he went to Hogwarts, when he was a little child, and might have been a friend of his family's. Specifically I think his mother's side of the family (because I for one DO believe that the memory Harry saw in the Pensieve was of Snape's parents, and not of Snape and his wife, for reasons I won't go into here, but will if anyone wants me to). I don't know if I have a can(n)on for this theory, but I think it's very likely. At the very least it's as likely as Mrs. Norris turning out to be the mysterious Florence ;) Does anyone agree with me? Do you think this could survive in Theory Bay? - Annalisa From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 15:46:20 2003 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 07:46:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why *doesn't* Molly work? In-Reply-To: <000701c3a8d4$3ccff2a0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: <20031112154620.97672.qmail@web20001.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84799 > Actually talking of that. If the weasley's are so > broke - why hasn't Molly > gone out to work now all her kids are at Hogwarts? I > mean with only her and > Arthur in the house during the term time and with > magic at her disposal, > exactly what does she *do* during the day? Obviously > now she could be doing > OoP stuff, but the order wasn't reformed till after > GoF, so that's three > years of very little to do. > > K Even if she had absolutely nothing to do during the day (which I do not believe) it doesn't means she *has* to work. The family does has enough money, they do get by. The kids don't have everything they'd like, but they have everything they need. Maybe she just prefers not to work. Maybe no one would hire her or all she could get is minimum wage. Note: what about tending the chickens, making sweaters, keeping the house clean, etc? And who says she has to be busy every minute of the day? ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 12 15:51:30 2003 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:51:30 -0000 Subject: Politics and Swearing in HP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84800 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Dicentra spectabilis" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nibleswik" > wrote: > > > I may have been seeing politics where there was just storytelling, > > but to me (and many of my friends, and, I'm sure, many on this > > list), the Grand Inquisitorial Decrees just reeked of the Patriot > > Act. > > Given that JKR devised the plot of the entire 7-book series before > 1997, I think it's safe to say that she's not parodying the Bush > administration or any part thereof in Book 5. Furthermore, as a > British author, I don't think that commenting on U.S. politics is > uppermost in her mind. The HP series deals with The Big Issues Of > Life, and therefore tends to address general principles rather than > particulars. When it was suggested that LotR was an allegory of WW 2, Tolkien wrote that people usually confuse *allegory* and *applicability*. LotR tells a tale of power and war and the moral dangers of using the enemy weapon against himself. WW 2 was about power and war. Yes, there are similarities. Rowling does applicability, not allegory. IMO you'd have to be blind not to see the political themes in the books, but trying to pin them on one particular case mgiht not be such a good idea. From history and politics we all know different cases of corrupt governments, appeasement politicians, interfering bureaucrats etc. Humanity will see it happen again and again and will applaud when the common people rise up against them. A lot more interesting than just political allegory, which tends to age rather quickly and be impenetrable to outsiders. Alshain, a political animal as well From kkearney at students.miami.edu Wed Nov 12 15:54:23 2003 From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:54:23 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84801 The Sergeant Majorette says: > > > The WW has been ripped off. They signed up for a bold, stalwart St. > > > George of a Gryffindor. Instead they get this ratty looking kid in > > > welfare glasses, Forrest Gump with a wand. And Suzanne questioned: > Surely you're not implying that Harry is developmentally disabled? Uh, I believe she's implying that Harry's fame and success are due to relatively normal actions accompanied by continuous right-place-at- the-right-time circumstances. -Corinth From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Wed Nov 12 16:05:11 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:05:11 -0000 Subject: uniforms In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84802 > > ARYA said: > > The only classes that we seem to have any canon evidence for the > > classes being mixed together is for Potions with the Slytherins and > > Herbology with the Hufflepuffs. It hasn't ever been mentioned for > > any other classes and it could be possible the classes are almost all > > one house per class. Or it could be that the classes are segregated-- > > Slytherins all up front and on the right, Gryffindors on the left, > > Hufflepuffs, in the back, behind the Slytherins and Ravenclaws, fall > > in into the last quadrant of the room. Afterall, except for > > Herbology or Potions, we never hear Harry describe what any student > > other than a Gryffindor says or does in class. justcarol67 wrote: Actually, his first-year flying class with Madam Hooch and his classes on Care of Magical Creatures were with the Slytherins. (For all I know, he may have History of Magic with the Ravenclaws--we just don't know. ARYA AGAIN: I had a feeling I forgot something--thanks. (Stupid inability to have a set of books here at work. As if they couldn't be reference materials for my job....pshaw!) aS FOR HoM, I would think a lecture- only class such as this would lump all the students of all houses together. Why not? We probably would never hear about this because everyone is so bored to death that they never notice anything as they fall asleep. Plus, Binns never stops to ever take points away from anybody. You know, for both CoMC and Potions, I would consider those heavily- lab or practical orientated courses with the course "materials" being limited. (Potions ingredients are expensive and you can only get so many blast ended skrewts) Not sure what that means.... > From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 15:22:40 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:22:40 -0000 Subject: I need help, s'il vous plat In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84803 > My current problem is that I have only the French translation > of "Quidditch through Ages", but I would like to know the exact > version of some sentences and expressions. So if you can help me, > thanks a lot! Here it is: > 1) In the preface by Dumbledore, I can read: ? Le Quidditch > nous a fait ?voluer autant que nous avons fait ?voluer le > Quidditch . ? >From the English version - "As we have developed the game of Quidditch, so it has developed us; Quidditch unites witches and wizards from all walks of life....." (QTTA p. vii UK edition) > In english, it would be approximatively "Quidditch improved us as > much as we improved Quidditch". What is the right quote? > 2) In the French version, Bowman Right is "un habile > ensorceleur de m?taux", something like "a skilful/clever metal > charmer". What's the exact expression? Canon again: "The invention of the Golden Snitch is credited to the wizard Bowman Wright of Godric's Hollow (that name rings a bell....). While Quidditch teams all over the country tried to find bird substitutes for the Snidget, Wright, who was a skilled metal-charmer, set himself the task of creating a ball that mimicked the behaviour and flight patterns of the Snidget." "QTTA p.14 UK edition) Geoff From jjpandy at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 16:12:01 2003 From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:12:01 -0000 Subject: Teacher stereotypes (love them!) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84804 As a teacher myself, I love JKR's uses of teacher stereotypes to create a balanced school faculty. McGonagal is the strict, but fair teacher. Snape is mean and plays favorites. Binn is dull and monotonous. Flitwick, Hooch and Sprout are good teachers, probably remembered fondly by those students who favored those particular subjects. Lupin was kind, knowledgable, and respected (except by Slytherins). Mad-eye Moody (or who we thought was Moody)was scary, yet entertaining at the same time. Dumbledore is the beloved Headmaster/Principal. Hagrid is the first-time teacher whose heart is in the right place even if his lesson-planning skills need work. The creation of Umbridge's character and role in Book 5 brought the Harry Potter books closer to reality for me. As a teacher, I loved every scene where Umbridge was interacting with another teacher. My favorite scene being the observation of McGonagal's class. Three cheers for McGonagal!!! In previous books, JKR let the Hogwarts teachers be very real in their comments and reactions: their looks and comments towards Lockhart because they saw him as a "fake" or at least as a "show-off", McGonagol's remarks to Trelawney, Snape's observations of Lupin when he subbed for him (easy grader, unorganized because there was no record of lessons covered). I find the teaching staff at Hogwarts to be very believable. And I cheered for them as they showed their rebellion against Umbridge by letting student behavior get out of control. As a recent member, I have found that this message-group has turned my computer into my Mirror of Erised: I find myself sitting in front of it for hours on end just as Harry sat in front of the mirror. Although no Dumbledore will remove my computer to a hidden location, how I wish I had Hermione's Time-Turner! -JJPandy From altered.earth at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 16:32:40 2003 From: altered.earth at ntlworld.com (digger) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:32:40 +0000 Subject: The Talents of Molly Weasley Message-ID: <3FB260A8.7070405@ntlworld.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84805 Dear comrades I feel I must rush to the defence of Molly Weasley, and stand alongside those who hold her in high esteem. I do not run to this position because of her excellent and wide-embracing mothering qualities. Oh no! Whilst these heart qualities are indeed wholly admirable and most valuable, I must have some acknowledgement given to her witchy talents. This is no weak, can barely-charm-a-saucepan, stay-at-home witch. This is a powerfully magical being who just happened to fall for a modest guy, have regular enthusiastic sessions with him in the marital bed, and as a consequence produce a very large family of healthy and extremely able wizards. This probably deflected her from the career choices would have had after completing her NEWTs. So what did she major in? Potions, of course! Don't you remember her gossiping to Ginny and Hermione about how she brewed illegal love potions while she was still at school? That is advanced potions. Where do you think those devious twins get their genetic inspiration from? Not from Arthur, thats for sure. The twins show no sign of interest in Muggle Studies or artifacts. They are enterprising and innovative in their thinking, and they have to be VERY good at potions to come up with the product range of Weasleys Wizard Wheezes. They are truly Molly's offspring, and that is probably why she tries to be hard on them - they most resemble her at that age, and show her what she might have done if she had not followed the path she did. Can I mutter 'jealous' under my breath? That accounts for her dissapproval of their venture. Of course, I'm not even touching on "that excellent clock of hers". Was it an heirloom? If so, how did she enchant it to recognise all her current family members and their states of well-being? Dumbledore's reference to it indicates that it is not a usual artifact to find in any wizardly household. I vote for More to Molly than meets the Eye. "digger" From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Wed Nov 12 16:26:54 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 10:26:54 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Does the sorting hat sort? References: Message-ID: <00a001c3a93a$70161ac0$8ff11d43@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84806 > GEO > I agree. Afterall Rowling and the books are really big on free choice > and will over pre-destination, class, genetics and all that other > stuff. Afterall if it sorted people into their houses by their > qualities then Harry would have been a Slytherin, Hermione a > Ravenclaw and Neville a Hufflepuff. > Iggy here: I think it truly sorts people... but that one's free choice goes into it. Here's what I mean: I don't feel that you simply chose inside your head what House you want and get sorted into that House... and only end up in Hufflepuff if you're not sure. (For one thing, that makes Hufflepuff the "Hogwarts Dust Bin for Students," and it also seriously devalues the important contributions of Hufflepuff House itself.) What the Hat does, since it can obviously (at least to me) enact Legilimens, is to sort through the sortee's memories and past choices and uses those to decide. Let me give you a few examples here: Harry - Would have done well in Slytherin because he not only has a certain disregard for the rules, but also possesses some of Voldemort's being in himself. Whenever we have seen him disregard the rules (for the most part) however, it has been not with intent to further his own ambitions, but rather to help others. When it comes down to it, unlike a Slytherin, when it's important, he ultimately puts others before himself. I don't really thing we need to evaluate his qualities of courage, since that's pretty much clear from what we see in the books. Hermione - Would have done well in Ravenclaw due to her strong intellect, cleverness, and sense of logic. Was put in Gryffindor because she, especially with her strong logical streak, decided to live in a world that, in terms of the RW, is completely illogical and attempts to understand it and do well there. She also, like Harry, ultimately puts others repeatedly before herself. People may say repeatedly that she puts some of her own interests above others, but I don't really believe she does this when push comes to shove, and I also don't feel she does this any more than any normal human. Neville - Would have done well in Hufflepuff because he plods along steadily through life, is good at Herbology (which requires the ability to nurture things) and supports his friends through thick and thin. Was placed in Gryffindor, IMHO, because he has been very courageous in his life. He has stood up better than most would under what has happened to his parents, including visiting them regularly. He is willing to stand up for what he feels is right, even though it goes against his friend's wishes, and he is determined to improve and focus his talents when he finds a goal worth fighting for. These aren't traits that come on suddenly, they're aspects of a life lived with feeling this way. Luna - IMHO, she's a Ravenclaw for a good reason. Despite the fact that she has shown great courage, and has faith in the existence of things without concrete proof, she still has an amazingly clear and realistic view of the world. When it comes to the truly important things, like acceptance of what happens in life and learning from it, and dealing with death issues, or seeing people's potential pretty clearly, she is a very level headed and wise person. Remember, in come lores (like Native American lore) the Raven is a trickster spirit who can find humor in what it sees, and also sees the world a bit differently. I feel that this is manifested quite well in Luna, which brings out this side of the Raven while the other Ravenclaws bring out the intellect and analytical parts more. Draco - Is a Slytherin because he's underhanded, elitest, sneaky, self-aggrandizing, and works to advance himself and his personal goals at the expense of others. IMHO, the quality of ambition alone does not put you in a particular House, but willing to meet your goals preferably at the expense of others rather than yourself puts you squarely in Slytherin. Draco has exhibited this at least a few times in each book. I also feel that his family being in Slytherin for generations has an influence as well, since he grew up in said family, he was also taught their morals (or lack thereof) and methods for advancing himself. Ron - The majority of the Weasley family has been in Gryffindor, and this has an influence on the kids. I'll also point out that, while panicky and skittish at times, nervous and occasionally queasy, he still does what needs to be done. Since book one, he has shown a willingness to possibly sacrifice even his own life if the situation was important enough. (Nobody had any way of knowing that the chessboard *wouldn't* kill a living, human piece.) He has faced his fear of spiders and the Forbidden Forest, he has been willing to stick with Harry and the rest of the gang in going to the MoM, and constantly shows courage when what's important is on the line... even though we know he'd rather not have to. As I said before when I was addressing Neville, one does not manifest these qualities suddenly after they are placed into a House, they are placed into a House because they have shown these qualities in the past through the decisions the make and how they chose to conduct themselves, even before they ever arrived at Hogwarts. So yes, I agree that your choices help determine what House you're put into, but they are the choices you made in the past, not your choice of House. (Remember, Harry asked the hat *not* to place him in Slytherin, he didn't ask it to please place him in Gryffindor. He didn't chose what House to go into, he just requested not to go into a particular House.) Iggy McSnurd From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Wed Nov 12 15:43:02 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 09:43:02 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Avada Kedavra Meaning References: <20031112111441.41274.qmail@web40015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <004f01c3a933$a995d120$8ff11d43@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84807 > 12Nov03 > > Hermowninny wrote: > I know there's someone in the groups that can enlighten me as to the > meaning of Avada Kedavra. Also, I'd really like to know where on the > net I can look up latin meanings. > Iggy here: I love all the grand thories about this. My personal one is fairly simple... It's based on the word "Abracadabra" and altered just enough so that it's not really that word. In slight support of Paula, I will point out that there was a ritual one used in the far past based on the word Abracadabra... It was written in a descending pyramid on a piece of parchment, dropping one letter at a time from the end, and was used to get rid of illness as you got rid of the word. The parchment was worn for a day, then tossed into a fire (IIRC) to finish the ritual. ABRACADABRA ABRACADABR ABRACADAB ABRACADA ABRACAD ABRACA ABRAC ABRA ABR AB A (Sorry it was in a triangle and not an invirted pyramid, by mailer won't let me do that...) Iggy McSnurd From jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net Wed Nov 12 17:37:41 2003 From: jones.r.h.j at worldnet.att.net (Robert Jones) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:37:41 -0000 Subject: How many Prefects are there? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84808 Nothing in the plot turns on this question, but I would still like to know the answer: how many Prefects are there? I mean, is being appointed a Prefect a one-year gig, or do those who are appointed Prefects in their fifth year remain Prefects in their sixth and seventh years? In other words, at any given time, are there *two* Gryffindor Prefects or *six*? Maybe someone who knows the British boarding school system can shed some light on this. From thren at subreality.com Wed Nov 12 17:33:37 2003 From: thren at subreality.com (Thren) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:33:37 -0500 Subject: Halfblood v. Pureblood (was Re: Of course Snape is a Slytherin) In-Reply-To: <1de.12a267a7.2ce32432@aol.com> References: <1de.12a267a7.2ce32432@aol.com> Message-ID: <3FB26EF1.6090406@subreality.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84809 Adrianna wrote: >Which is something I >never really understood. Both of his parents were magical. Yeah, Lily was >muggleborn but I don't see how that makes Harry a halfblood, like, say, Tom >Riddle. > > > And now Thren writes: If you want to get literal, Harry can't be a pureblood because his blood isn't 'pure'. He's still got Muggles in his background. And if you want to see how he's a halfblood, go back a generation. He's got two wizard grandparents (presumably), and two Muggle grandparents. 2/4 = 1/2. Halfblood. That's how I always looked at it, anyhow. I have this argument with my sister at least once a week. :) But it's still different from how Seamus is a halfblood, or Tom is a halfblood. I think there should be a special word for people like Harry, who have the Muggles so close in their background, yet aren't Muggleborn. You could apply the Fraction Theory further back (ie if you've got 4 of 8 /6 of 12/8 of 16 great(xN) grandparents who were Muggles, but that's getting a bit extreme. On the other hand, even just having three terms (pureblood, halfblood, mudblood/Muggleborn) has gotten the WW into enough trouble as it is. I think it's interesting, though, that Malfoy hasn't thrown his halfblood status up to him. He obviously knows Lily was Muggleborn, and you'd think he'd take every opportunity to remind Harry (in every way possible) that he's not an equal. But he doesn't. So maybe while purebloods are the 'best', halfbloods are also acceptable? They've at least got *some* traceable wizarding blood in them- maybe that makes a difference? Either way, you don't see anyone going after halfbloods, do you? When Malfoy warned them to get Hermione away if they didn't want her strung up like the Muggles, why didn't Harry fall under that as well? I find it hard to believe that just having two wizard parents makes you okay in Voldie's books, given how set he is against Muggleborns. He kills whole families (ie, would kill a Muggleborn and his/her pureblood spouse, and any children), but I can't remember anything about anyone with Muggle heritage further back than one generation being snuffed. Erm. Train of thought being derailed. So, why the focus on Muggleborns, but not a peep about halfbloods- or at least, halfbloods like Harry, a generation removed? Thren, who's hoping this made sense... From darkthirty at shaw.ca Wed Nov 12 17:51:51 2003 From: darkthirty at shaw.ca (dan) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:51:51 -0000 Subject: RW, Muggle World, Witchwizard World (was Re: SHIP: Hr, GW, LL) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84810 Carol (who wishes she were less RW) > Dan, you've said several times that you think Luna is the only RW > character besides Harry. What do you base that on? She doesn't seem at > all Real World to me. (She sees Thestrals, senses the significance of > the veil, etc.) Do you mean that she's familiar with death or that > she's ostracized for being different? Can you clarify your thinking > for me? To explain this, I guess a small description of what I percieve as the so-called Potterverse is required. And, in some measure because of the caricature being done in the series, or, as a current thread or two has it, stereotyping, the circumference of Potterverse has always seemed to me to be the RW, us, from the line-ups at midnight to the Great Patriotic War, from beach balls to batons, computer games to Krasnoyarsk. The reflection of that world, the hyperbolized RW, the magicless one, would be the muggle world, which affects and is affected by the witchwizard world. This last is Erised, in a way. I said a while ago that a naive reading of the books stares into Erised, while a more critical one just wants to. I have also previously, in ANOTHER HARRY, triangulated a third Harry (neither the RW boy upon whom the character is based nor the book Harry, but a Harry who will be liberated, as JKR is liberated, from the closet, a purely imaginary, for the most part philosophical Harry, the Harry that the RW Harry *might* have become), and in the same way the three components of Potterverse are a kind of triangulation. By presuming that Luna is another RW character for whom JKR has triangulated a possible future, I am responding to, not only what made me pose the two questions I asked a week or two ago, but a sense of internal necessity that I get from OOP in particular. There are a couple things to mention regarding this. In some ways, I wondered why was Luna from Ravenclaw - is it only because JKR couldn't bring in a Gryff at this stage, or is it part of the evolving plot? These and other considerations always seemed less important, however, than the function Luna serves in the stories. For a long time on this list, there were discussions (of which I was a part) regarding Harry's lack of curiousity, or rather, the fact that he didn't seem to ask many questions, or "make moves", as it were. Partly, no doubt, because not asking questions was "the first rule" of living with the Dursleys. Luna's function, at the end of OOP, is as the object of Harry's curiousity - rather like, to use a RW example from my own life - the strange kid who bounced a ball against the wall of the public school I attended all recess and lunch hour, alone, every day for years, who I approached one day and started talking to. The conversation that ensued is not the point (though I can perhaps be convinced to go over it briefly, if anyone is interested). The point is, that it was relatively easy for me to talk to this ostracized person - it was a situation in which, on reflection, I had a rather unbalanced measure of so-called power. What stuck me at the end of OOP is the absence of the abuse of that power by Harry. He was talking to an equal, even if the pity he felt at the start of the encounter demonstrated, in some small way, the potential imbalance of power. But, even more striking, was the fact that, at that point, the internal necessity for a character like Luna suddenly came clear. The Quibbler was necessary in terms of plot, but somehow Luna herself was necessary to advance the psychological story - Sirius could only go so far(not very) and no further. In most cases, in fact in all cases, JKR has hidden the internal psychological Harry from us - perhaps from herself? At any rate, this is no longer entirely the case. And it is by this act, this scene, that JKR signals the RW Luna, I submit. As Harry acknowledges the other, the other exists in that acknowledgement. This has been hinted at with Neville and his folks, with the Weasley's and their apparent low-income status, and in other ways, but it has not broken free of Harry's closedness. When it does, in that late OOP scene, Harry is aware of - his own feelings, regarding Sirius, regarding Luna, regarding Luna's feelings, just as Luna is aware of hers and Harry's, even the initial pity, as it were. It is, I suggest, an encounter between Third Harry and Third Luna. Does that help? Dan From rredordead at aol.com Wed Nov 12 17:59:40 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:59:40 -0000 Subject: Heirs of Hogwarts. Was Dorcas Medows Heir of Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff? In-Reply-To: <24.490cd2df.2ce3229d@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84812 > Jen wrote: > My belief is that Harry is the Heir of Gryffindor and before Harry, so was James. LV wanted to eliminate any threat to him, I think being > heir to one of the most powerful wizards of the age has some > advantage and LV wanted to get rid of that. Now me: I have to question whether it is possible for the Potters to be the *only* true heirs of Gryffindor. Why, because Hogwarts was founded 1000 years ago and there would be 1000s of descendants of the four founders alive today. And while it is possible to believe the title has moved down through the generations from eldest child to eldest child, so only one person (male or female) holds the tile at any one time, it is an enormous task to hold on to a title like that and not have *everybody* know it. The family must guard the title with their lives, literally, as their existence as the Heir of 'whatever' depends on them owning that title. It seems to me they would hold on to the name proudly and proclaim it at every opportunity. Lord Voldemort Heir of Slytherin or James Potter, Lord of Gryffindor. Or some such thing. Look at Britain's royal family for a good example. Do you realize how many wars, murders, coups and inter-marrying had to take place to hold on to the royal line? And how many times has it has changed families? Most recently the crown should have skipped from the Windsor family to the Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderbert-Glucksburn family when the Queen married Prince Phillip (who was a Prince of Greece and Denmark and took on his mothers name Mountbattern because it was thought to be more English, read: pureblood than Philippos Schleswig- Holstein-Sonderbert-Glucksburn). But because of the war it was deemed prudent to have Prince Phillip take his wife's family name and keep the crown in the Windsor family. An event, which was very unusual and took and act of parliament to make it happen. Confusing eh? ;-) What I'm saying is it is hard for me to believe that if James was the sole heir to Gryffindor why has the WW has kept it quiet? And why don't we, as well has Harry know of it? A title as big as one of the Heirs of Hogwarts is a huge deal, right? The entire WW would be aware of who is who. Also, didn't Harry have plenty of opportunities to find this out in the CoS, as his title as potential Heir of Slytherin was in question. Any of the students could have mentioned the small issue of him also being the Heir of Gryffindor if any of them knew. However, that said, we are dealing with fantasy literature so I concede it could be possible and an intriguing idea for there to be a sole heir to each of the 4 founders of Hogwarts and how that might come in to play in the next books. So we have: The Heir of Slytherin- Lord Voldemort, The Heir of Gryffindor- Harry Potter Who are the Heir's of Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw? Was Dorcas Meadows one of them. It might explain why Voldmort killed gave her the special touch of killing her personally? One last note, a title doesn't have to necessarily have to pass to the offspring of the title holder. The reigning title holder can sometimes dictate just whom the title passes on to, naming that person as heir. The Roman emperors did it that way. Occasionally British monarchs in the middle ages did it. Now this is pure speculation but Lord Voldemort, although he wants immortality, still needs an Heir and some of his Death Eaters have kids coming of age soon. Wouldn't that be another notch in Lucius Malfoy's belt to have his son names as Heir of Slytherin. :-) Mandy From kcawte at ntlworld.com Thu Nov 13 02:25:06 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:25:06 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] How many Prefects are there? References: Message-ID: <000901c3a98d$5fba3eb0$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84813 Robert Jones asked > Nothing in the plot turns on this question, but I would still like > to know the answer: how many Prefects are there? I mean, is being > appointed a Prefect a one-year gig, or do those who are appointed > Prefects in their fifth year remain Prefects in their sixth and > seventh years? In other words, at any given time, are there *two* > Gryffindor Prefects or *six*? Maybe someone who knows the British > boarding school system can shed some light on this. > Me (K) Well I think that once a prefect you stay one till you leave school (barring any major trouble) but I think there's a third option. I think it's entirely possible that as well as the two prefects appointed in the fifth year there are more appointed in either the sixth or seventh year - so you would have the six you mentioned plus a few more. I think even going with the minimum size estimates for Hogwarts (approx 300) 24 prefect (possibly plus head girl and boy) is too few. K From rredordead at aol.com Wed Nov 12 18:28:37 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:28:37 -0000 Subject: Halfblood v. Pureblood In-Reply-To: <3FB26EF1.6090406@subreality.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84814 > Adrianna wrote: > Which is something I > never really understood. Both of his parents were magical. Yeah, Lily was muggleborn but I don't see how that makes Harry a halfblood, like, say, Tom Riddle. > Thren wrote: > I think it's interesting, though, that Malfoy hasn't thrown his > halfblood status up to him. He obviously knows Lily was Muggleborn, and you'd think he'd take every opportunity to remind Harry (in every way possible) that he's not an equal. But he doesn't. So maybe while > purebloods are the 'best', halfbloods are also acceptable? I know this has been discussed before but I can't remember the post numbers. If you do a search you might find some interesting posts. Basically the train of thought amongst the Purebloods is this if you're have 2 Muggle parents your a Mudblood and if you have one drop of Muggle blood in your ancestry you're a Halfblood and there for dirt, pure and simple. Thren brings up and interesting idea: why hasn't Malfoy brought up Harry's Halfblood status? It would seem as though Malfoy would use that against Harry, he insults him in every other way. Perhaps the halfbloods are a little bit more accepted by the purebloods. Perhaps they are seen a more worthy adversary. Something to practice magic on and use to the purebloods advantage. The purebloods can not survive alone and they are going to have to procreate with someone. Marriage to a halfblood has got to be better than mudblood. Although, come to think, of it I doubt marriage would be an option, but now I have nightmare vision of Atwood's 'The Handmaids Tale' happening in a pureblood WW. I'd be interested in other opinions. Mandy From t.forch at mail.dk Wed Nov 12 18:36:23 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:36:23 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Avada Kedavra Meaning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031112192945.00b91a10@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 84815 At 04:15 12-11-03 +0000, you wrote: >Check out the Spell Encyclopedia of the Lexicon. It includes the >derivations and etymologies of every spell, including Avada Kedavra >(which is Aramaic, by the way). Do you know the meaning of the individual words of the killing curse? And/or the transliteration from Aramaic? I've searched a few sites in an attempt to learn which part expresses the wish and which part expresses the destruction, but I haven't been able to find anything conclusive. Another question that has bugged me a bit is whether there is an actual, significant, difference between the phrases 'Prior Incantato' and 'Priori Incantatem' - I originally thought that the latter was plural, but both are singular. Any help on those two would certainly be much appreciated. Troels From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Wed Nov 12 18:17:14 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 12:17:14 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Heirs of Hogwarts. Was Dorcas Medows Heir of Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff? References: Message-ID: <002001c3a949$348d7b60$74d21e43@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84816 > Mandy: > The Heir of Slytherin- Lord Voldemort, > The Heir of Gryffindor- Harry Potter > Who are the Heir's of Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw? > Was Dorcas Meadows one of them. It might explain why Voldmort killed > gave her the special touch of killing her personally? > Iggy here: *grin* I think, if there really was an "Heir" for each house... (but I am inclined to agree with Steve, that it's a fan construct) Luna Lovgood is the Heir of Ravenclaw. (*chuckle* Why else make her so important in the stories with an Heir system... if that was the case... We'd have seen two of the other Heirs... As for Hufflepuff... Maybe Cedric was the Heir, and we will see a new one surface... *grin* Or possibly it's Ernie McMillan...) Iggy McSnurd From sharon8880 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 18:30:16 2003 From: sharon8880 at yahoo.com (sharon) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:30:16 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84817 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" wrote: > The Sergeant Majorette says: > > > > The WW has been ripped off. They signed up for a bold, stalwart > St. > > > > George of a Gryffindor. Instead they get this ratty looking kid > in > > > > welfare glasses, Forrest Gump with a wand. > > And Suzanne questioned: > > > Surely you're not implying that Harry is developmentally disabled? > > Uh, I believe she's implying that Harry's fame and success are due to > relatively normal actions accompanied by continuous right-place-at- > the-right-time circumstances. > > -Corinth Sharon Continues: I think the Sgt. Majorette may have been referring to a short lived slang term that was derived from a quote that Julia Roberts made to Brad Pitt in the film "The Mexican". She says something to the affect of "I don't know how, but you've Forrest Gumped your way out of that one." Meaning you were in the right place at the right time or you were very lucky. Not everyone knows how "right place right time" has played a part in Harry's success. Most just know the outcome-the success. I still can't figure out why kids at Hogwarts didn't flock to him when he first arrived. Yes, Draco made an effort & was rebuked, but I don't recall others. As far as looks go, there are plenty of music stars out there that are not that great looking (Kid Rock, Axl Rose, etc), but are worshipped none the less because of their star status. I thought is was a common human desire to "rub elbows with the stars". Why didn't the kids at Hogwarts want to do this with Harry when he first got there being as how he kind of had this star status in the WW? Sharon From FinduilasMyDarkdream at lycos.de Wed Nov 12 18:23:17 2003 From: FinduilasMyDarkdream at lycos.de (finduilasmydarkdreamer) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:23:17 -0000 Subject: How many Prefects are there? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84818 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Robert Jones" wrote: > Nothing in the plot turns on this question, but I would still like > to know the answer: how many Prefects are there? I mean, is being > appointed a Prefect a one-year gig, or do those who are appointed > Prefects in their fifth year remain Prefects in their sixth and > seventh years? In other words, at any given time, are there *two* > Gryffindor Prefects or *six*? Maybe someone who knows the British > boarding school system can shed some light on this. I think the answer is most likely to be that there are two prefects from each house at Hogwarts per year. I think so because I remember Percy, one of the Gryffindor Prefects, leading the first years, including Harry, up to Gryffindor Tower after the start of term feast in PS/SS. Then, in CoS, the Polyjuiced Harry and Ron (as Crabbe and Goyle) and later Draco, too, run into Percy who is patroulling (so it seemed to me) the floors leading to the dungeons. Even though Percy is probably a person who likes to give orders and keep others from breaking rules I can't see any other reason than his prefect's duties to make him wander the castle when everyone is told to go straight to- and from classes preferably in company of co- students. He doesn't seem to me like somebody who would try to catch the Monster single-handed, so I guess his task was to prevent students from wandering the floors of the castle without a good reason. Therefore I assume that when one is chosen as a prefect, he will stay a prefect unless he acts so irresponsibly and with severe consequences (for example endangering others) that he is inacceptable and clearly the wrong person for this job. But as I daresay Dumbledore has got his reasons for appointing prefects - even in Draco's case I hope there's some urge to socialize the boy or to come to know how he will handle a certain amount of power given to him behind it - I don't think this will be the case very often so that usually prefects will be in this position from their fifth- to their seventh year. Additionally, I think when Sirius told Harry in OotP that "Remus got the badge" (to 'tame' his bullying Marauder friends), it is likely Dumbledore thought he could rather manage that during three terms instead of only one. SnapesRaven alias FinduilasMyDarkDreamer http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SnapesCauldron From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 18:46:20 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:46:20 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84819 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith wrote: > > I'm feeling a bit sour. > Not my usual sunny disposition, spreading sweetness and light > everywhere. > No song on my lips, no pat for the neighbour's moggies. > Instead it's a snarl and a size nine. > > When I'm in this sort of mood, friends try and distract me with a pint or two, but of course that's not possible by internet. Pity. And what has brought me to this pass? I'll tell you. > > Stereotyping. > > By the posters. Laura: I feel a certain responsibility for having brought about Kneasy's unusually dyspeptic state of mind, so I'd like to add a few thoughts and reactions to his post. I can only hope that this will help restore him to his usual sweet and endearing optimism. I hope he considers this as a poor substitute for a couple of pints. Kneasy: > The antics in the Potterverse of various characters and groups have raised much comment from posters whenever they see a divergence from their own patterns of acceptable behaviour. That's to be lauded - in such circumstances comparisons are expected and welcome, it's all part of the fun and games of analysis (or even post facto rationalisation) inherent in a discussion group like ours. > No problem so far. > > I start to get itchy when when posters start to flat-out tell JKR that she is wrong in what she writes and I become positively restive when, as in a post made recently, there is a comment to the effect that she's not quite as bad as was thought, but she must do better. Even with a *g* tacked onto the end of the paragraph this reads as verging on the pretentious and patronising. > > Posters, it seems, hate stereotyping - except when it's their own. > Some are determined not to be happy unless JKR writes words that match their personal prejudices. Laura: You (and Steve and others who agreed with you on this) are quite right, of course. No author of fiction is required to present all sides of her story or include characters from a checklist representing all possible human variations. It's her story to tell as she wishes and it's our choice to read it or not. Wrong-headed as this kind of critique is, I see it as a sort of left- handed compliment. (Don't even go there-I'm left-handed myself!) These books have a remarkable ability to touch people very deeply, so deeply that they-okay, we-feel a part of the world the books portray. And the shortcomings of that world are painful to us. In that sense, JKR may have succeeded *too* well. (!) The very realness of the WW and its intersections with the RW make us think of what goes in in our own little worlds and it's often not a pretty picture. If the picture that JKR paints makes us uncomfortable, upset, even angry, then JKR has done her job. We as readers have to let her do it, and recognize where the line between fiction and reality is drawn. Let's face it, if the WW were perfect and flawless, there wouldn't be any books, would there? Kneasy: > Outbreaks of outrage occur every few weeks. All it takes is for > some-one to decry Elvish degradation or sexism or gender typing or > racism and the pot starts boiling again. But strangely, other books don't get the same treatment. When comparisons are made to other fantasies, fictions or even what some may consider philosophical or religious source books the same standards don't seem to be applied. Laura: There is, in fact, critique being written that does that very thing. At Nimbus, any number of the presentations made overt comparisons between HP and LOTR, Ursula LeGuin, Pullman and other fantasy/scifi series. We don't get too in depth with that on this list because of the habit we all have of sliding into OT discussion, but I'm sure that many listees would love to get into detailed literary comparison. I don't read fantasy/scifi, but I can draw a comparison to Holmes critique. The topics have ranged from women in the canon to Doyle's attitude about imperialism to Holmes and Watson's sex lives and everything in between. Just about every word has been dissected, analyzed with the most microscopic attention to details that Doyle probably just tossed off without much thought. The difference is that the Holmesian world is long past. Although some critique went on during Doyle's lifetime, the great bulk of it has been done since the canon was closed. So there are 2 significant differences between Holmes and HP analysis: HP canon is still incomplete and the events of the books are contemporaneous with our lives. Those facts lead to several results: we are probably all drawing conclusions that will turn out to be erroneous (except you, of course, Kneasy!), we don't yet know what JKR ultimately has in mind in terms of overall meaning for the books (or if she has any at all), and we experience HP a whole lot more personally than most Sherlockians could ever experience the world of Victorian England. Neither ACD nor JKR are historians or sociologists-they're fiction writers, and the worlds they portray, realistic as they may seem, are still the creations of their authors. Kneasy: > > Minority groups (religious or racial) form only a small part of English society. Laura: I'm staying far away from this one except to agree with Pippin that Anthony Goldstein made me smile too, and I hope JKR is planning to create a nice Jewish girl for him. *g* Kneasy: Even a superficial analysis of the text militates against Elvish slavery. Laura: I'll accept that there's something very strongly magical about the house elves and that their condition is probably not exactly one of slavery. But I do wonder why they'd put up with the kind of mistreatment the Malfoys and the Crouches doled out if they have the option to leave. I hope this will become clearer in the remaining 2 books. Kneasy: > Lately sexual stereotyping has been centre stage. Oh, dear. Am I > mistaken or has freedom of choice been banned by some posters? Molly in particular has taken the brunt of the criticism. She is at fault because she is not this, that or the other. Mothers must not present a motherly image it seems, or at least only do so in the gaps in their busy, professional schedule. All women must conform to a certain fashionable profile or be damned. Rubbish. Of course, Petunia does not get the same amount of flak for the same behaviour because she is not intended to be a sympathetic character, so it's all right, in fact it's positively praiseworthy that she embodies a 'negative image'. Molly is a well drawn portrait of a common British phenomenon - the traditional mum. They can still be found in large numbers, but some posters fume at the thought of their very existence in this fictional realm, let alone the factual world. Perhaps they feel threatened by her; maybe they are not so secure in their choices after all. Methinks they doth protest too much. Some nagging doubts, are there? Laura: The Molly controversy is a rather interesting one to me because I see it as something of an indicator of where we are in the feminist revolution. Many women (and some men) have learned to be sensitive to portrayals of women and girls in fiction. We know how profoundly the stories we read can affect the world in which we live, and we know that the literary past has often shortchanged, patronized or ignored female characters. So we are hyper-alert. The mistake I think some of us might be making is to assume that one book, or one series, can determine societal attitudes on any issue. The fact that JKR chose to present her story from the viewpoint of an adolescent boy leads to a certain perspective in the books that somewhat limits the opportunities for female characters. But JKR didn't create sexism and even if she were 100% even-handed in the gendering of her characters (ugh-sorry about that literary-snob phrasing) she couldn't make it go away. It's the entire literature of a culture that fosters stereotypes, not just one author's work. My impression is that literature for children and adolescents nowadays is full of strong, fully fleshed out female characters. I also think that girl readers of HP can identify with many of Harry's qualities and reactions. Feelings aren't male or female- anyone can feel unloved, misunderstood, unsure of one's identity, anxious in a new situation-and that's just book one! My problem with Molly wasn't that she's an at-home mom or that she's loving and protective. It's that she was cruel to someone who didn't deserve it at all (most uncharateristically of her) and who could have benefitted from some love and understanding himself. I think she made a difficult situation worse, and she had every reason to know better, having had the benefit of over 20 years of happy family life and knowing how rare that is, in the WW or anywhere else. Petunia doesn't get the same amount of flak for her overindulgence of Dudley because we don't think, judging from what JKR shows us, that she could do any better. In terms of her mothering technique, she's a lost cause. And let's face it, Dudley would have been better off if Petunia *had* gone to work and left the child-rearing to someone else. In this respect, JKR is utterly realistic-an at-home mom doesn't necessarily lead to emotionally well-balanced kids, and a mom with a paying job doesn't necessarily lead to love-deprived kids. Kneasy, I do think that you're overstating the case to a degree. I don't think anyone is suggesting that women be forced into the workplace whether they want to be there or not. I don't think that listees believe that at-home mothers are inferior in some way to working (outside the home, that is) mothers. And feminism is a bit more than fashion-it's a global liberation movement that may be the most profound source of societal change since the Industrial Revolution. But you have, perhaps inadvertently, put your finger on the core of the problem. Based on the experiences I've had, the women I know and what I've read, I believe that women are indeed insecure in their choices. There's good reason for that-in our society, women are wrong no matter what they do. If you have kids and stay home, you're not living up to your potential, turning into a vegetable, not being a good role model for your kids, etc. etc. If you have kids and go to work, you are putting your selfish interests above your kids, trying to be too much like a man, not being a good role model for your kids, etc. etc. So yeah, I think women are constantly re-evaluating their choices and fearing that they made bad ones. We have yet to affirm as a culture that *both* working outside the home and staying home are good, valid, valuable choices. Some of the recent discussions here on the list have been these anxieties spilling over, I think. Hoping that Kneasy enjoys a speedy return to emotional equilibrium- Laura, at home mom who's still waiting for the bonbons ;-) From seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 12 17:26:51 2003 From: seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk (seraphina_snape) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:26:51 -0000 Subject: Teacher stereotypes (love them!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84820 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jjpandy" wrote: > As a teacher myself, I love JKR's uses of teacher stereotypes to > create a balanced school faculty. McGonagal is the strict, but fair > teacher. Snape is mean and plays favorites. Binn is dull and > monotonous. Flitwick, Hooch and Sprout are good teachers, probably > remembered fondly by those students who favored those particular > subjects. Lupin was kind, knowledgable, and respected (except by > Slytherins). Mad-eye Moody (or who we thought was Moody)was scary, > yet entertaining at the same time. Dumbledore is the beloved > Headmaster/Principal. Hagrid is the first-time teacher whose heart is > in the right place even if his lesson-planning skills need work. > sera says: I absolutely agree. When I read "Philosopher's Stone" again last week, I thought: "Wow, Snape is just like that mean maths teacher you had in 10th grade" or "Yes, I know a McGonagall myself". Rowling creates stereotypes. But that we actually find those in real life just shows how much our society is build upon certain, er, stereotypes. When I think back to my school days, I can certainly name the "good" and the "Bad" teachers, the "mean" and the "nice" ones, and I could compare them to Hogwarts' teachers. sera From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 18:48:18 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:48:18 -0000 Subject: Avada Kedavra Meaning In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031112192945.00b91a10@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84821 > Another question that has bugged me a bit is whether there is > an actual, significant, difference between the phrases 'Prior > Incantato' and 'Priori Incantatem' - I originally thought that > the latter was plural, but both are singular. > > Any help on those two would certainly be much appreciated. > Geoff: Without having a Latin dictionary to hand, I have a feeling that "Prior Incantato" is bad Latin. Prior seems to lack a case ending. Incantato smacks of a Dative to me. The second "looks" more correct to me though Incantatem seems like an Accusative. There are other examples in HP of possible misuse. The curses should, I think have a "-us" (Nominative) ending; Cruciatus, Imperius etc. whereas the command word is a Vocative; Crucio, Imperio etc. I'll have to see if I can root out a Latin primer. It's a long, long timne since I did Latin but it was a fine language to learn - gives you and enormous insight into linguistics and other languages with a case structure - like German for example. From t.forch at mail.dk Wed Nov 12 19:00:03 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:00:03 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Heir of other houses In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031112193759.00bc79c0@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 84822 At 04:28 12-11-03 +0000, you wrote: >In my opinion, the idea of the "Heir of Slytherin" refers to someone >who rises up to champion Slytherin's ideals again, not to an actual >blood heir. Yes - a spiritual heir - just as one might say about some physicist that he is the 'heir of Newton' (or some other famous antecedent). >In that way of thinking, there isn't going to be an heir of the >other houses since they don't have such a strong position that needs >championing. The conflict between Gryffindor and Slytherin seems to me to represent, to some extend, the conflict between good and evil in the magical world. The conflict between good and evil might be said to, in the magical world, be fought by proxy through the inter-house conflict. In that respect the cause of Gryffindor might be just that; to oppose Slytherin. To the extend that there is an "Heir of Slytherin" the Gryffindor (current or old) who opposes this Slytherin can be said to inherit the role of the house founder; that of opposing Slytherin. In that respect I think it's fair to speak of an Heir of Gryffindor - also of an inherited cause that needs a champion. >In the books, no one is ever refered to as the heir of anything >except for Slytherin, and the only time that idea comes up is in book >two. The word "heir" never even appears in any other book. The whole >Heir of Gryffindor idea is a fan invention. I tend to agree, though, as I said above, the title might not be entirely misplaced whether Rowling intends to use it or not. The problem is, IMO, that the evidence really is there - we have some very strong evidence that associates Harry with Gryffindor, but it can equally well be there to prove that Harry very strongly represents the Gryffindor virtues and to prove a more direct connection between Harry and Godric Gryffindor. Harry is strongly associated with Gryffindor - the question is whether it is 'just' the house or if it also the founder. However, Harry is, IMO, as much an heir in spirit to Godric Gryffindor as Voldemort is the heir in spirit to Salazar Slytherin (Voldemort also being an heir in the flesh of Slytherin is an added bonus for him ;) Troels From nibleswik at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 18:53:25 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:53:25 -0000 Subject: Heir of other houses In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84823 > What do you think became of the Heirs of Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff? > I > wonder if their identies will be revealed and if it will play into > things to come. Maybe one of the ways LV may need to be killed is > that all of the heirs have to come together to vanquish LV. Harry of > course is the Heir of Gryffindor. Have you been reading Cassandra Claire? Hee. I don't think that would happen. As Steve Vander Ark noted, tracing lineage over a thousand years is sketchy at best. Furthermore, why would Harry be the heir of Gryffindor and not Slytherin? Is Draco going to be the heir of Slytherin? And what about Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff? Hermione and Ginny? (If you haven't read Cassandra Claire, I probably sound insane.) I think the idea's kinda . . . I don't know . . . too neat, perhaps. Besides, the prophecy didn't say anything about "heirs uniting" or "the houses combining to bring the Dark Lord's downfall". I think it's going to be Harry and LV. Only them. Maybe they'll fight over the body of DD. Cheekyweebisom From nibleswik at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 18:37:00 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:37:00 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna Oh my! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84824 It seems to > me that the major "SHIPS" people seem to like are H/H, H/G, > and > H/L is it only me? Or does anyone else out there think that none of > these girls are right for Harry? Personally, I hate H/Hr. Absolutely despise it. I also don't like H/L. I'll buy H/G, though I'm not particularly excited about it. I kind of wonder about Harry and Tonks. I don't think JKR's said how much older she is than him. We know she isn't THAT old, as she's a new Auror, and by the time Harry's graduated, age will matter much less anyway. She's someone he looks up to, but at the same time, isn't above him. So I like that as a possibility. I also don't like R/Hr. I love Ron; I love Hermione. I don't want them together. I don't see how they're AT ALL compatible. I think, yes, there will be a relationship at some point, but I really hope it'll just be a phase. On the other hand, I do like R/L. Like Hermione, Luna's very different from Ron. Unlike Hermione, Luna's wacky, and that seems to better fit Ron, I think. And other stuff that I can't remember offhand. Cheekyweebisom From rredordead at aol.com Wed Nov 12 18:55:10 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:55:10 -0000 Subject: How many Prefects are there? In-Reply-To: <000901c3a98d$5fba3eb0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84825 > Robert Jones asked > Nothing in the plot turns on this question, but I would still like > to know the answer: how many Prefects are there? I mean, is being > appointed a Prefect a one-year gig, or do those who are appointed > Prefects in their fifth year remain Prefects in their sixth and > seventh years? In other words, at any given time, are there *two* > Gryffindor Prefects or *six*? Maybe someone who knows the British > boarding school system can shed some light on this. Now me: My experience was that there were two prefects for each year in the 5th, 6th and 7th years of school. So 6 prefects in all, 3 boys and 3 girls. Now the 6th and 7th years, called the 6th Form and the Upper 6th. Don't ask why. Are different only because you are dealing with 16-18 year olds. At this age in Britain you are of age to have sex and drink some low alcohol beverages at 16 and vote and drink at age 18, so you have essentially young adults who are still in school with 12 year olds. So often times in the last 2 years of school are kept separate from the youngsters. In a different buildings even. In my school we had a separate common-rooms, bathrooms and even our own kitchen. However in Hogwarts they all seem to be together. But I digress. The prefect badge is for one year only, although often it is awarded again and again if you got it once. The 5th year prefects look after the 5th years. Their authority over the 6th and 7th years would be sparse. For Hermione to over rule Fred and George is unusual. In the real world, they would have laughed her out of the comon-room and she would have had to get the help of an older prefect to have had influence over the twins. IMO there would have been older prefects in the room anyway, who would have spoke up in Hermione's defense. A good prefect would not have let the situation of a younger prefect disciplining an older child even happen in the first place. In my school we had Head of House as well as Head Boy and Head Girl. There is only one Head Boy and Head Girl in the whole school and they would be from different houses! Which is part of my argument about James and Lily not being in the same house but, this is JKR's world not the real world. FYI: I don't know of any school in Britain who gives out different school uniforms to different houses. All kids wear the same colour ties, jumpers, scarves, hats etc. In the school colours. In my case it was Green and Grey, which is why I'm so fond of Slytherin I expect. No indication of House allegiance is show on the body. When you are in school you just get to know who is in what house because you spend all day every day with them. In most cases you sleep altogether with those in your year and sex too. Only the common- rooms would be separate. Anything else? Mandy From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 18:51:12 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 18:51:12 -0000 Subject: Hogwarts castle (and plumbing) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84826 > Steve Vander Ark wrote: > > On the other hand, there weren't castles of any kind a thousand > > years ago either. Rowling can do whatever she wants with her world. > > Geoff wrote: > On a point of information, both Windsor Castle and the Tower of > London were built during the reign of William I (1066-87) which makes > them perilously near being a thousand years old...... > OK, they been added to since, but so probably has Hogwarts. Warning to the squeamish: This post contains references to toilets and plumbing. Please skip it if you find the topic distasteful. If I'm correct, the castles Geoff mentions were originally Norman keeps, built in a very different style from what we usually think of as a medieval castle (the "fairytale" castles of Germany, for example). Certainly plate armor like the armor in the Hogwarts hallways had not been invented a thousand years ago. (The Normans and their contemporaries wore chain mail.) So my theory is that Hogwarts is magically modernized every few centuries. It's now (roughly) a fifteenth-century castle with early twentieth-century plumbing. There were no flush toilets in the days of Salazar Slytherin, which makes me wonder about the passage from the girls' restroom (I'm American, sorry!) to the Chamber of Secrets. . . Also some of the portraits and other decorations seem to date from the 18th century or thereabouts and Sir Cadogan seems to be wearing plate armor, so I'd date him as fifteenth century. In other words, Hogwarts looks like a late medieval castle on the outside, which means that the exterior hasn't been modernized for about 500 years, but the interior has been magically updated a bit more frequently, possibly to meet the needs of muggle-borns who are used to living in the RW. (Dumbledore mentions that a certain room once provided him with a large number of chamber pots, but I'm sure that it would have turned into a relatively modern restroom with flush toilets for Harry or Hermione in similar circumstances.) The prefects' bathroom has hot and cold running water (as well as magical bubbles)--not a luxury provided by medieval castles even in the 15th century, much less the eleventh. Carol, who is trying not to think about Moaning Myrtle being flushed down to the lake with the sewage, or the resulting pollution of the lake From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Wed Nov 12 19:10:25 2003 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:10:25 -0000 Subject: sexism in the WW In-Reply-To: <00d101c3a77a$aafd94e0$9ddc5644@aoldsl.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84827 --- Debbie wrote: > [I]t is strongly implied that Amelia Bones > is single. (If she is Susan Bones' aunt and > she is married, by the WW conventions we see > she would have a different last name.) I had likewise taken the impression that Amelia was unmarried and childless, although more as a negative impression than from anything said explicitly. Your point about the name is a fair one, although Amelia could also be Susan's aunt by marriage to a parent's sibling (probably, in that case, Susan's father's brother), rather than herself being a sibling of one of Susan's parents. You make an interesting point about Alice Longbottom. I had not remembered the discussion from GF about her and Frank in such detail, and I did find it natural when OP referred to her as an auror. Having read what you quoted from GF, I have to agree that JKR may well not have had Alice penciled in as an auror before OP. On the other hand, JKR's decision to make Alice an auror when the time came to flesh out Neville's parents is at least a further indication of an equality of status for women that has run through JKR's depiction of the WW throughout all the books. For instance, your assertion that: > In the WW, as well as here, it appears that > women have a much more difficult time reaching > the top of their professions if they must juggle > work and family. is *very* weakly supported. (It is not perfectly clear whether you mean that working mothers have a harder time than other working women or harder than working fathers, but there is little support available for either statement.) Rowling has never said that Elfrida Clagg or Dilys or Rowena Ravenclaw or Helga Hufflepuff or Minerva McGonagall -- or Umbridge, for that matter -- was unmarried or childless. She has specifically indicated that it is wrong to assume (as you appear to do) that the Hogwarts teachers are unmarried merely because we never see their families. See Comic Relief interview transcript at http://www.comicrelief.com/harrysbooks/pages/transcript3.shtml ("Q: Have any of the Hogwarts professors had spouses? A: Good question -- yes, a few of them, but that information is sort of restricted -- you'll find out why.") Indeed, that last point could be made more general: as noted in my prior post discussing Alice Longbottom and Madam Edgecomb (#84097), unless it serves some plot function, we very rarely learn much about the family relationships of anyone Harry meets in a professional capacity. So, while you're right that Madam Edgecomb is the "only WW example [other than Alice Longbottom] of mother with a paying job," that's mostly because we don't know whether all those other working women we see are mothers. And that veil of ignorance isn't unique to the women -- unless I missed someone in my earlier post, we only hear about five working fathers in the WW: Arthur Weasley, Frank Longbottom, Mr. Lovegood, Amos Diggory, and Barty Crouch, Sr. The only working parent whom we know has had "difficult[ies] ... juggl[ing] work and family" is Barty Crouch. He is said to have let his family down pretty severely because of his singleminded devotion to work, perhaps even to the point of contributing to his son's decision to become a Death Eater. Then, as we see, he overcompensates by helping his son escape Azkaban, with disastrous consequences. You refer to Madam Edgecomb as an example of the conflict between career and children ("Marietta's mother ... fears for her position if her daughter was found to be associating with Harry Potter"), but she cannot lend much support to your argument. Madam Edgecomb fears for her job not because she is a working mom but because she works for a corrupt bureaucracy that judges its employees' loyalty based on the actions of their family members. Those concerns are not limited to working mothers or to women: Percy Weasley worries in exactly the same way about his family's loyalty to Dumbledore and Harry hindering his career advancement. I think you and I agree that JKR *intends* to be portraying a WW where professional stature is not dependent on gender. I am not sure why you are struggling to find holes in that portrayal. I think it would be fair to say that her portrayal of such a world is overly idealistic and fails to confront real-world problems like work-family balance and glass ceilings. But I don't think it's fair to read those issues into the portrayal when JKR has (it appears to me) consciously chosen not to put them there. -- Matt From manawydan at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 12 19:12:22 2003 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:12:22 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Lily's and James' Parents References: <1068611730.12310.27460.m8@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <003701c3a950$e938d6c0$84e66151@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 84828 Jen asked: >Does anyone have any suspicions to how Lily's or James' parents >died. It was close after graduating from Hogwarts. Their parents >would not have been old because Lily and James were in their late >teens, early twenties when they died. Do you think it has to do with >LV????? I do... I know JKR has not made this an issue but maybe >Harry's grandparents' history will have some light shed on it, or >Petunia will hold the key or spill the beans. Some suppositions for you. Let's suppose 1. Following the "worst memory" incident, Severus Snape reflects on Lily's action and her kindness to him. No girl's ever been kind to him before, they've all been like the "broomstick girl" in the other memory. He develops a crush on her (or possibly an obsession). 2. Lily, of course, starts going out with Severus's worst enemy, and, later, marries him. 3. Severus leaves school, signs up for the DEs and takes the Dark Mark. (the last two aren't supposition, of course, they're canon) 4. During the Voldemort era, Severus is either guilty of, or at least complicit in, killing both the Potters and the Evanses. Killing the Potters is his way of getting back not only at James, but also Sirius. Killing the Evanses is his way of getting back at Lily for rejecting him (and hey, you don't need an excuse for killing a muggle or two...) 5. Suddenly Petunia's hatred and fear of the WW come into perspective, don't they. and 6. I wonder how Harry would react to finding all that out? Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 19:10:58 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:10:58 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84830 Hermowninny wrote: >> Perhaps the sorting hat simply puts you into the house you really >want to go in. From the mirror of erised, we see that it is possible for inanimate object to detect what you want. Draco obviously *really* wanted to be in Slytherin. He was put there. Ron *really* wanted to be put in Gryffindor. He was put there. Perhaps the conversation the sorting hat had with Harry was just the hat's way of making sure that Harry was certain where he wanted to go.>> Roo wrote: > I think that when it comes to Sorting, the Hat does make its decision strongly on the desires of the student that's wearing it- it listened to Harry, and I bet when it "heard" Draco's wishes to be put in Slytherin, it complied. I think that it probably only ever makes its choice on something deeper when either the student really doesn't have much of a preference (perhaps someone like Luna?), or when they're Muggle-born, and don't know enough about the houses. Other times, I imagine it would very rarely go against the wishes of the person wearing it. This ties in with the theme of choice determining who you are, but also gives the Sorting Hat something to do, other than grant people wishes.> Probably it's a combination of the two factors. Draco belongs in Slytherin, not just because he wants to be there or because of his family history but because he's cunning rather than book-smart (Ravenclaw) and he certainly isn't brave (Gryffindor). The hat would have had no need to take into account his disdain for Hufflepuff because the placement would have been obvious. With Crabbe and Goyle, who are dumb as rocks, the hat may have taken family history into account, but it probably put them in Slytherin because they expected to go there. They may not have any ambition, but they certainly don't qualify as loyal, hard-working Hufflepuffs, so Slytherin is the only option. And Neville probably hoped, as Harry did, that he simply would be placed in any house other than Slytherin and not sent home. I very much doubt that he dared to hope for Gryffindor. But the hat saw something in him that he didn't know was there and (rightly) placed him in Gryffindor rather than Hufflepuff. I think it really "knows" where a student belongs and takes the student's wishes into account only when he or she would be suitable for more than one house. But if the Sorting Hat has "never yet been wrong," how did Percy get into Gryffindor? I hope he shows some true courage in the next two books. Carol From nibleswik at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 19:26:24 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:26:24 -0000 Subject: Politics and Swearing in HP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84831 > > I may have been seeing politics where there was just storytelling, > > but to me (and many of my friends, and, I'm sure, many on this > > list), the Grand Inquisitorial Decrees just reeked of the Patriot > > Act. Dicentra: > Given that JKR devised the plot of the entire 7-book series before > 1997, I think it's safe to say that she's not parodying the Bush > administration or any part thereof in Book 5. Furthermore, as a > British author, I don't think that commenting on U.S. politics is > uppermost in her mind. The HP series deals with The Big Issues Of > Life, and therefore tends to address general principles rather than > particulars. > > Her depiction of the MoM, the Educational Decrees, and Umbridge > encompass a particular pattern of human behavior that crops up from > time to time in every civilization. Me (Cheekyweebisom): That's a good point. It can be applied generally, certainly. As to your comment about JKR having planned the books years ago, a friend of mine who is quite a successful fantasy author and writes series (series looks wrong, but I'm sure it isn't serieses . . . grr) writes the plots beforehand, but does change them if there's something that's come up that she wants to include, whether politically inspired or culturally, etc. I imagined that JKR did the same. And as for JKR commenting little or not at all on U.S. politics because she's British, I'm not sure I agree. I can think of British authors, performers, screenwriters, directors and the like who definitely comment on U.S. policies -- Salman Rushdie springs to mind, for example. That said, JKR may very well not have been commentating on politics for other reasons, and I think you're right in pointing out the greater validity of applying it to humanity as a whole. Cheekyweebisom: > > I'm occasionally irked by the almost complete absence of swearing, > > though, as it seems unrealistic to me. Dicentra: > Though she usually avoids the actual expletives, she does mention > that people swear. For example, "Ron swore," or "Ron said something > that made Hermione say, 'Ron!'" Me (Cheekyweebisom): You're right! I'd forgotten that. Still, through reading the books, I'm very apt to go, "What?! They're thirteen/fourteen/fifteen and the world is basically blowing up and they say, 'damn'? Yeeeeah. Um, no." I suppose, though, that one can only say, "Ron swore" a limited number of times in one page. Or chapter. Dicey Elf: > Please remember that although it is permissable to discuss whether > JKR is advancing political ideas and which ones they might be, it's > probably not a good idea to comment on current political events such > as the Bush administration. Me (Cheekyweebisom): Sorry about that. It won't happen again. Cheekyweebisom From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 19:34:11 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:34:11 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84832 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "The Kirk" wrote: > wrote: > > > Perhaps the sorting hat simply puts you into the house you really > > want to go in. > > > > Draco obviously *really* wanted to be in Slytherin. .... Ron > > *really* wanted to be put in Gryffindor. .... > > > > Perhaps the conversation the sorting hat had with Harry was just > > the hat's way of making sure that Harry was certain where he > > wanted to go. > > I think that when it comes to Sorting, the Hat does make its > decision strongly on the desires of the student that's wearing it- it > > > Roo bboy_mn: Sorry, but I take exactly the opposite view. It said in the book that there are 4 houses and that the Sorting Hat puts students into house based on personality characteristics. There is no reason to assume that the most obvious method is wrong. I think the Sorting Hat uses personal preference as a 'tie-breaker'; as the last thing considered when making it's decision. The had seemed to want to put Harry in Slytherin, but as it evaluated Harry, it spoke as if it saw characteristics of all the houses in him. When Harry said he didn't want Slytherin, the hat argued for the advantages and benefits of Slytherin. Harry insisted 'not Slytherin', at no time did Harry specifically ask for Gryfindor. So the hat considered Harry's desire, but didn't us it as the sole bases for it's decision. Just my opinion. bboy_mn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 19:41:59 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:41:59 -0000 Subject: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: <20031112134142.81744.qmail@web41215.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84834 > Jennifer wrote: > Does anyone have any suspicions to how Lily's or > James' parents died. > I know JKR has not made this an issue but maybe > Harry's grandparents' history will have some light > shed on it, or Petunia will hold the key or spill the > beans. > Vinnia wrote: > I strongly suspect that one of Lily's parents is still > alive. He(or she) could not take Harry in, because > his(her)blood is only half of Lily's blood. > > Harry would probably get to meet Mr/Mrs. Evans in book > 6/early book 7, through Mark Evans. > I agree that Mark Evans is important (and distantly related to Harry), but if his parents were Lily's grandparents, Dumbledore would not repeatedly have referred to Petunia as Harry's "only living relative." Also the ages are wrong. Mark is ten years old in OotP and unlikely to be L and P's first cousin. The ME/HP connection has to be so distant that Mark's family (who are clearly muggles based on the neighborhood they live in) has passed out of the consciousness of the WW. (I think, if it matters, that Harry and Mark are approximately second cousins and both are the result of some squib/muggle marriages a few generations back.) In any case, it's pretty clear that Harry's grandparents on both sides are no longer alive. James's parents were wealthy (JKR interview) and presumably well-known in the WW; my guess is that they were killed by DEs. Lily's parents were muggles, so their deaths are hard to account for in terms of VWI, but they loved Lily and were proud of her, and Dumbledore would certainly have placed Harry in their keeping if they were alive. Carol From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Wed Nov 12 19:46:53 2003 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:46:53 -0000 Subject: Caput Draconis, WAS: Re: Fate of HANDSOME guys in the Harry Potter series In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84835 --- catlady Rita wrote : > I thought there was a star named Caput Draconis, > but what I have found ... is: > > Thuban (alpha Draconis) > Rastaban (beta Draconis) > Eltanin (gamma Draconis) > Altais (delta Draconis) Perhaps you were thinking of Kappa Draconis (the tenth star of the constellation Draco, following the Greek lettering scheme). See http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~kaler/sow/kappadra.html -- Matt From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 19:55:59 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:55:59 -0000 Subject: Hermione's Last name In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84837 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "katia112003" wrote: > I was reading _Fahrenheit_451_ by Ray Bradbury and saw that the man > whom Montag meets (who introduces him to "the Book People") was named > (probably last-name) Granger. Could this be where JKR got Hermione's > last name? I thought it was funny that Granger is a walking library > :) > > Just Musing, > > Katia, > who has been a member of this group for six months, and finally > decided to post. bboy_mn: It's possible that is may have inspired her. She seems to be very well read, and many of the references in her books come from other literature. Don't know if it's relevant, but historically, Grange and Granger refer to farm and farmer. Just a thought. bboy_mn From nibleswik at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 19:58:01 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:58:01 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84839 >Afterall if [the Sorting Hat] sorted people into their houses by their > qualities then Harry would have been a Slytherin, Hermione a > Ravenclaw and Neville a Hufflepuff. I disagree. Harry /might/ have been a Slytherin. I think we can't say for sure that based on qualities alone, he'd have been put in Slytherin. I believe the purpose of the Hat going on about his potential in Slytherin was to find his choice. "Not Slytherin . . . anything but Slytherin" is a very Gryffindor thing to say (or think). If it were going strictly on qualities, there would have been no point to saying that. I don't think it's necessarily evidence that he would have been in Slytherin, just that he could have been and that the Hat itself is a Slytherin -- very cunning. Based on qualities alone, I think Harry would still have been a Gryffindor. Yes, he's ambitious, but he isn't particularly cunning, and he is very, very brave. And he isn't TRULY ambitious. Someone truly ambitious wouldn't have wanted to be anyone else, even after the death of their godfather. And why does everyone think Neville would be a Hufflepuff? I think he's one of the bravest characters in the books. Yes, he's loyal, but I think he's brave first and loyal second. Furthermore, if there's an instance where the Hat was sorting based on qualities, I think Neville was probably it. Why? Because it's sort of like a line from The Perks of Being a Wallflower -- "We accept the love we think we deserve." Similarly, I don't think Neville really aspired to be a Gryffindor, because he didn't think he deserved it. He thought he should have been a Hufflepuff. Hope that made sense. Cheekyweebisom From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Wed Nov 12 20:16:00 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:16:00 -0000 Subject: Another Theory was:Snape and Harry (Re:Snape Theory right here...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84840 > Iris: > > > I always found this scene very enigmatic. Why did Harry change into > > Snape in Dumbledore's thoughts? Why does JKR associate their images > > with gold? > > Should we understand that both Snape and Harry are precious to > > Dumbledore; that Dumbledore loves Snape just the same way he loves > > Harry? Maybe he sees them as his spiritual sons. > > Or should we consider that there's a strong tie between Snape and > > Harry? Another time, the Pensieve shows the similitude. In OotP, it > > appears that 15 years- old Snape was physically very similar to > > Harry (they both look pinched and unhealthy; they both look sloppy; > > they both are given rough times). Does Snape hate Harry because he > > can recognize himself in the boy? > > And finally, we mustn't forget that they both have a strong tie > with > > Voldemort, they both wear a physical mark he gave them. Voldemort, > > formerly known as Tom Riddle. Another strange boy, with strange > > ideas and a hard childhood. Dumbledore took interest in that boy > too when he was still at Hogwarts. > > Dumbledore, Riddle/Voldemort, Snape, and then Harry. Do they > compose > > a lineage? Not being "a Snape's expert",I'd like to know if this > has > > been debated yet, and would be happy to read your comments. > > Annalisa: > > I actually have a theory percolating in my brain that's rather like > this ... I was thinking of of posting it to TBAY (I even (almost) > have an acronym for it!) but I've never posted to TBAY before so I > was hesitant to do so. So I'll outline it here. > > Similar to what you've said, I detect a very close relationship > between Dumbledore and Snape, almost father/son-like; even when > Dumbledore rebuffs Snape, or teases him - for one thing, Snape puts > up with it, which is very unlike him, and for another, despite the > fact that Dumbledore disagrees with Snape so many times, he still > seems to be very fond of him. > > Basically it's my theory that Snape and Dumbledore share a > connection, as in a familial connection. That does not necessarily > mean there is a blood link between the two of them -- though I don't > rule that out -- but that Dumbledore knew Snape before he went to > Hogwarts, when he was a little child, and might have been a friend of > his family's. Specifically I think his mother's side of the family > (because I for one DO believe that the memory Harry saw in the > Pensieve was of Snape's parents, and not of Snape and his wife, for > reasons I won't go into here, but will if anyone wants me to). > > I don't know if I have a can(n)on for this theory, but I think it's > very likely. At the very least it's as likely as Mrs. Norris turning > out to be the mysterious Florence ;) > > Does anyone agree with me? Do you think this could survive in Theory > Bay? > > I've kind of been fostering the theory that since Dumbledore is an Occlumens and Snape is an Occlumens and someone had to teach Snape how to do this....(hmm, someone say perhaps who may want to help Snape be capable of lying in Volde's presence in order to spy?)...and I think it was D-dore who taught Snape. Now, we can see from Harry- Snape Occlumendcy lessons that if one is open to see, then an awful lot of insight can be gained about a person while teaching them this art. I tend now to think that D-dore's affection and trust of Snape is directly related to the likelyhood that Dumbledore once soent hours pointing his wand at Snape and crying, "Legilimens!", making Snape gasp upon the floor as he shared his own agonizing childhood and past life. Arya From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Wed Nov 12 20:25:53 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:25:53 -0000 Subject: Heir of other houses In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84841 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hp_lexicon" wrote: After a thousand years, it is highly unlikely that they know who is the direct heir of anyone. I don't think it's even possible to trace an heir over that many centuries. Everything about the Founders is shrouded in mystery and legend. The dates aren't even precise. > > Actually, it's not that difficult to fathom, considering the average lifespan in the wizarding world is at least double that of muggles. Dumbledore is 150-ish and Madam Marchbacnks is old enough to have tested Dumbledore whenhe was a kid and both of these two characters are quite spry, and still working (not to mention D-dore can do a bit fancy styling with his wand such as in his office whenhe leaves the school and the fight in the atrium of the MoM). This cuts down a century (to us muggles) into, at least half that time. That and given the fact that Hogwarts has a magical quill that writes down the name of every magical child born, I think it might be quite easy to keep track of these things whenthe blood lines stay within the WW. It's when the blood mingles and diverges into muggleville and squibland that things may become hazy. Books like "Nature's Nobility: A Wizarding Geneology" don't just write themselves--people obvioulsy find this important enough to write a book about it. I'm sure the Black tapestry isn't the only one.....and who knows, they could certainly be self-updating ones that do the genetic links magically. Arya (Who thinks the whole Heir is much more than some fan invention...blood is important....look what Volde did with it to be reborn!) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 20:15:55 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:15:55 -0000 Subject: Why *doesn't* Molly work? In-Reply-To: <20031112154620.97672.qmail@web20001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84842 Rebecca said: > Even if she [Molly] had absolutely nothing to do during the > day (which I do not believe) it doesn't means she > *has* to work. > Maybe she just prefers not to work. > Note: what about tending the chickens, making > sweaters, keeping the house clean, etc? And who says > she has to be busy every minute of the day? Not to mention that she was almost certainly homeschooling Ron and Ginny until their admission to Hogwarts in SS and CS respectively, which (along with housework) would have given her very little time to work outside the home. Her duties in the Order now provide a new outlet for her energies, a new way of being useful without outside paid employment, but I'm not sure it compensates her emotionally. Without considering the money question, I think Molly is suffering from Empty Nest Syndrome, along with very real fears for her family. She has been a stay-at-home mother since Bill was born some 25 years earlier (his exact age isn't clear). I don't think she's emotionally ready to just go out into the world and earn her living selling magically knit sweaters (or whatever), even if anyone would buy them. Carol From nibleswik at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 20:21:05 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:21:05 -0000 Subject: Why Ravenclaw? was, Re: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: <00a001c3a93a$70161ac0$8ff11d43@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84843 > Luna - IMHO, she's a Ravenclaw for a good reason. Despite the >fact that she has shown great courage, and has faith in the >existence of things without concrete proof, she still has an >amazingly clear and realistic view of the world. When it comes to > the truly important things, like acceptance of what happens in >life and learning from it, and dealing with death issues, or seeing > people's potential pretty clearly, she is a very level headed and > wise person. Remember, in come lores (like Native American lore) > the Raven is a trickster spirit who can find humor in what it >sees, and also sees the world a bit differently. I feel that this > is manifested quite well in Luna, which brings out this side of >the Raven while the other Ravenclaws bring out the intellect and >analytical parts more. First of all, I want to say that I really enjoyed your entire post. I even agreed with most of it! How rare! Now, on to my response: I really like your analysis of Luna. At first, your designation of her as a trickster set off "Huh?" bells in my head, but now I think you're right. I often interpret "trickster" as the Coyote kind of trickster in Native American folklore -- the trickster much more like Fred or George. The Raven is a much more Luna kind of trickster; it's also much more Ravenclaw in general. (It even ties in with the whole bird emblem!) Luna, I think, is a very good example that even for those who really fit in a certain house, said house may not be the obvious choice for them. Neville's another good example -- an apparent Hufflepuff whom I think is, in a way, more Gryffindor than even Harry. Your post made me start thinking about another Ravenclaw, though. That's right -- Cho. I don't understand for the life of me why that girl is in Ravenclaw! I mean, she doesn't seem particularly intelligent or particularly intellectually curious; she doesn't appear to possess Luna's odd wisdom; she's just Cho! She's just kind of there. Do any of you have ideas about why JKR might have put her in Ravenclaw? She is still a rather underdeveloped character, so perhaps we just haven't seen her in action, outdoing even Snape in Potions. She just doesn't strike me as intellectually impressive or impressive in any way, for that matter. Cheekyweebisom From Meliss9900 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 20:39:18 2003 From: Meliss9900 at aol.com (Meliss9900 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:39:18 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Halfblood v. Pureblood Message-ID: <1eb.1308815a.2ce3f476@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84844 In a message dated 11/12/2003 12:32:27 PM Central Standard Time, rredordead at aol.com writes: > I know this has been discussed before but I can't remember the post > numbers. If you do a search you might find some interesting posts. > Basically the train of thought amongst the Purebloods is this if > you're have 2 Muggle parents your a Mudblood and if you have one drop > of Muggle blood in your ancestry you're a Halfblood and there for > dirt, pure and simple. > > I tend to think of Harry as a Full-blood rather than Half-blood. The difference IMO between Full and Half is that Harry has two magical parents. A true halfblood (also IMO) is someone with one magical and one muggle parent (examples include Seamus, Tonks and even Voldemort himself.) All had one magical parent (their mums coincidentally enough) and one muggle parent. Whereas Pure-bloods are families like the Weasleys, Longbottoms or Malfoys. Not a drop of muggle blood anywhere in their veins. Melissa [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jazmyn at pacificpuma.com Wed Nov 12 20:41:48 2003 From: jazmyn at pacificpuma.com (jazmyn) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 14:41:48 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Of course Snape is a Slytherin References: Message-ID: <3FB29B0C.8060606@pacificpuma.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84845 yolandacarroll wrote: (Snip) > > I'll now go back to Snape. Everyone knows that > he is whatever he is. His Slytherin housemates > would definately know who's pure and who's not. > So unlike Voldemort, Snape can't yell "mudblood" > and hope people will think he's something else. > They already know what his real parentage is. > > Yelling "mudblood" works for Voldemort, but not Snape. > > Yolanda > (Snip) Now you can explain HOW everyone would know who is pureblood and who is not? Malfoy might be from a rich and famous family and people might know his family, but Snape appears to have been from a poor family. Poorer even then the Weasley's. People might not know his parentage well enough to even be sure. Unless you are telling me that EVERY Slytherin child is a walking genealogy database and knows every single family down to the poorest hedgewitch in the outskirts of Scotland? Do they walk around with little magic bloodline detectors? No. If Snape told people he was pureblooded, even if he wasn't, would a bunch of school age kids bother to check? There is also the chance that Snape was adopted and the Wizards who raised him never told anyone but him. Hey, maybe finding out he was adopted and not a purebred after he graduated from school was part of what caused him to leave the DEs? He might have shouted Mudblood as a kid, but have we seen him say anything like that as an adult? Also. What would a wizard child of two Squibs be called? Not a mudblood, which is the child with both parents muggles. Squibs are not defined as muggles. Not a half-blood, since both squibs might have had magic parents. Would explain why Snape seems to be on good terms with Filch if he had one or more Squibs as parents? Jazmyn From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 12 21:23:09 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 16:23:09 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ogg the Gamekeeper Message-ID: <1cc.142cbccc.2ce3febd@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84846 justcarol67 at yahoo.com wrote: ? Sorry I didn't check the back posts. I'm a bit pressed ? for time. I still think it would be strange for Molly to be ? about 65 as the Ogg connection suggests. The ? descriptions of her make her sound middle-aged, say ? 45, and as I said before, unless there's something ? more to her character than we know about, she seems ? like the type who would marry early, and, as I didn't ? say, have a child about every 18 months to two years. ? (I like Molly. Please don't take this as criticism.) the ? only explanation I can think of that would reconcile ? Molly as we've seen her with Molly as a woman older ? than Voldemort is the idea that witches and wizards ? live longer, and by extension age more slowly, than ? muggles. JKR said in an interview that Dumbledore ? (who seems about 85) is 150 and MacGonagall (who ? seems about 55) is "a sprightly 70). If anyone can ? come up with a better explanation, I'd like to hear it. ? (Maybe you could just refer me to a particularly ? enlightening back post.) I think you are getting to what I meant to state, .Wizards do live much longer than muggles so at around sixty-five, Molly would be middle aged. But, as for her marrying early, maybe she did. JKR hasn't explained what she did before marriage or how anything in her life would have been pre-weasley children. There is also a possibility as with many women that she could have miscarried children before having Bill. ( That is strictly a theory to explain time lost) -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kcawte at ntlworld.com Thu Nov 13 05:23:22 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:23:22 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Teacher stereotypes (love them!) References: Message-ID: <006601c3a9a6$c1dda6e0$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84847 > sera says: > I absolutely agree. When I read "Philosopher's Stone" again last week, > I thought: "Wow, Snape is just like that mean maths teacher you had in > 10th grade" or "Yes, I know a McGonagall myself". Rowling creates > stereotypes. But that we actually find those in real life just shows > how much our society is build upon certain, er, stereotypes. When I > think back to my school days, I can certainly name the "good" and the > "Bad" teachers, the "mean" and the "nice" ones, and I could compare > them to Hogwarts' teachers. > K Well, the woman who handles my bank account went to school with JKR (which means that last time I was in the bank I spent ten minutes dealing with my account and nearly an hour talking Harry Potter and recommending web sites/yahoo groups). She swears that Snape is their chemistry teacher and McGonagall the English teacher, but obviously JKR has managed to take these specific people and change enough that we all recognize them. Although I never had a Snape at my school I do know a McGonagall. K From belijako at online.no Wed Nov 12 21:31:17 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:31:17 -0000 Subject: Heirs of Hogwarts. Was Dorcas Medows Heir of Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84848 Mandy wrote: > One last note, a title doesn't have to necessarily have to pass to > the offspring of the title holder. The reigning title holder can > sometimes dictate just whom the title passes on to, naming that > person as heir. The Roman emperors did it that way. Occasionally > British monarchs in the middle ages did it. Me: The problem with the question of heirs in the HP books is that Rowling hasn't really told us much about it. We don't know how the heir title is inherited in Rowling's world, it doesn't necessarily have to pass from parent to child in a direct line, and we don't know if all the four houses are supposed to have one at any given time. If I remember correctly the only heir ever mentioned in the books is the Heir of Slytherin, Voldemort. Voldemort claims to be the Heir of Slytherin, and Dumbledore seems to confirm it as being a rightful claim in CoS. The closest we get to Harry being the Gryffindor Heir is just a couple of "clues", like him drawing the sword of Godric out of the Sorting Hat, and DD telling him he is a "true" Gryffindor. But nothing more substantial than that. I've been speculating myself that there may be other ways of inheriting an heir title other than direct lineage. What if the reigning title holder, not necessarily "dictates" who the next in line is going to be, but "accidentally" passes it on... Remember the prophecy in OoP? "...the Dark Lord will mark him as his EQUAL [capital letters by me]... and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives...". Maybe parseltongue wasn't the only thing Harry "inherited" from Salazar himself via Voldemort that fateful day... And maybe the reason either Harry or Voldemort must be "vanquished" is that there can only be one Heir of Slytherin at any given time...So one has to go. I think it makes sense. Sort of :-) Berit From lmbolland at earthlink.net Wed Nov 12 21:57:42 2003 From: lmbolland at earthlink.net (goodnight_moon5) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:57:42 -0000 Subject: DD's affection for Snape, was:(Re:Snape Theory right here...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84849 Arya wrote: > I think it was D-dore who taught Snape. Now, we can see from Harry- > Snape Occlumendcy lessons that if one is open to see, then an awful > lot of insight can be gained about a person while teaching them this > art. I tend now to think that D-dore's affection and trust of Snape > is directly related to the likelyhood that Dumbledore once soent > hours pointing his wand at Snape and crying, "Legilimens!", making > Snape gasp upon the floor as he shared his own agonizing childhood > and past life. > Interesting theory, Arya. I suppose I thought Snape learnt occlumency the same place he learnt all the curses he knew before coming to Hogwarts. (According to Sirius in the cave in GOF.) One question for you: do we have canon for DD feeling actual *affection* for Snape? Have we seen him behave affectionately toward him? Yes, in Every Book DD tells someone, "I trust Severus Snape." But Dumbledore trusts people he should not trust, in every book. (Erm... primarily DADA teachers.) Considering those two facts - that DD continually says he trusts Snape, and that DD trusts too much - make me very suspicious of Snape. (As JKR means me to be, no doubt, LOL.) Lauri From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 22:08:54 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:08:54 -0000 Subject: Halfblood v. Pureblood In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84850 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > > Adrianna wrote: > > Which is something I never really understood. Both of his parents > > were magical. Yeah, Lily was muggleborn but I don't see how that > > makes Harry a halfblood, like, say, Tom Riddle. > > > Thren wrote: > > I think it's interesting, though, that Malfoy hasn't thrown his > > halfblood status up to him. .... So maybe while purebloods are the > > 'best', halfbloods are also acceptable? > Mandy: > > I know this has been discussed before but I can't remember the post > numbers. If you do a search you might find some interesting posts. > Basically the train of thought amongst the Purebloods is this if > you're have 2 Muggle parents your a Mudblood and if you have one > drop of Muggle blood in your ancestry you're a Halfblood and there > for dirt, pure and simple. > > ...edited... > > Thren brings up and interesting idea: why hasn't Malfoy brought up > Harry's Halfblood status? ...edited... > > I'd be interested in other opinions. > > Mandy bboy_mn: I think one thing should be clear from the stories, and that is the definitions of mudblood, half-blood, and pure blood are not etched in stone. They vary with the attitudes of each person, and enter that persons speech acording to that personal bias. Strictly speaking, Harry is not pure blood, he is full blood. He is a full blooded wizard with a witch and a wizard as parents. But he is not pure blood because his ancestry can not be traced back on both side through countless generations of full blooded witches and wizards. To some people, if you have any trace of muggle blood in you lineage, however slight or distant, then you are a mudblood; your blood isn't pure. To others, if you are from a promenent family and have had several, or perhaps only a few, generations of full blood intermarriage, then you have redeemed yourself and are 'OK' again. While there are times in the book when Harry is referred to, even by close friends and associates, as a half-blood, it is usually in a specific context, in a conversation or while making a statement regarding his mother. I think we can all agree that Seamus is a true, by nearly any definition, half-blood. My point is that other references to half-blood are not as sharply defined. So attitude, personal beliefs, emotional state, and context of the moment are the factors in determining how these terms will be used. Not every statement of lineage adheres to a ridged set of definitions. Beauty and blood are in the eye of the beholder. Just a thought. bboy_mn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 21:19:23 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:19:23 -0000 Subject: Luna and the RW In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84851 I wrote: > > Dan, you've said several times that you think Luna is the only RW > > character besides Harry. What do you base that on? She doesn't seem > at > > all Real World to me. (She sees Thestrals, senses the significance > of > > the veil, etc.) Do you mean that she's familiar with death or that > > she's ostracized for being different? Can you clarify your thinking > > for me? > Dan answered at length: > To explain this, I guess a small description of what I percieve as > the so-called Potterverse is required. the circumference of Potterverse has > always seemed to me to be the RW, us . The reflection of that world, the hyperbolized > RW, the magicless one, would be the muggle world, which affects and > is affected by the witchwizard world. This last is Erised, in a way. > I said a while ago that a naive reading of the books stares into > Erised, while a more critical one just wants to. Good. this much I understand and agree with. We're all drawn, possibly against our will, into what you call the Potterverse, as harry is drawn to the Mirror of Erised. I, for one, really ought to be someplace else, but the RW is so unappealing. . . . I have also > previously, in ANOTHER HARRY, triangulated a third Harry (neither the > RW boy upon whom the character is based nor the book Harry, but a > Harry who will be liberated, as JKR is liberated, from the closet, a > purely imaginary, for the most part philosophical Harry, the Harry > that the RW Harry *might* have become), and in the same way the three > components of Potterverse are a kind of triangulation. By presuming > that Luna is another RW character for whom JKR has triangulated a > possible future, I am responding to, not only what made me pose the > two questions I asked a week or two ago, but a sense of internal > necessity that I get from OOP in particular. Sorry, you've lost me here. Too theoretical. I like practical analysis with quotations and examples, concrete illustrations of demonstrable points. Abstractions and generalizations go over my head. I was and am hopeless with deconstruction. I imagine you excel at it. :-) > > Luna's function, at the end of OOP, is > as the object of Harry's curiousity somehow Luna herself was necessary to advance the psychological > story In most > cases, in fact in all cases, JKR has hidden the internal > psychological Harry from us And it is by this act, this scene, > that JKR signals the RW Luna, I submit. As Harry acknowledges the > other, the other exists in that acknowledgement. in that late OOP scene, Harry is > aware of - his own feelings, regarding Sirius, regarding Luna, > regarding Luna's feelings, just as Luna is aware of hers and Harry's, > even the initial pity, as it were. It is, I suggest, an encounter > between Third Harry and Third Luna. > > Does that help? > > Dan Whew! I'm not sure about the Third Harry and the Third Luna, but Otherness I understand from I won't say how many years of postgraduate literature courses. Essentially, you seem to be saying that Luna is a sort of mirror in which (whom?) Harry sees and acknowledges certain aspects of his psychological self that he hasn't grasped in his interactions with Ron or Hermione or Sirius or anyone else. Apparently Harry is a mirror for Luna, too, but she understands this relationship better than he does at the moment, having already to some extent come to terms with her feelings (about death). Is that what you mean? In any case, thanks for attempting to explain what you meant. I'm still not sure how Luna as Other (or mirror) makes her a Real World character, but I do agree with you that at least part of her function is to help him understand himself. Carol From belijako at online.no Wed Nov 12 22:08:24 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:08:24 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84852 Cheekyweewisom wrote: the Hat itself is a Slytherin -- very cunning. > Based on qualities alone, I think Harry would still have been a > Gryffindor. Me: Just a little comment: Even though the Hat has the Slytherin trait of being cunning, it used to be a Gryffindor actually... According to the Sorting Hat's song it was originally Godric's hat, which all the four founders then put some brain in so it could choose for them when they were dead and gone... I imagine there is a little of both Helga's, Rowena's, Salazar's and Godric's brain in there... :-) And on the question of Harry's qualities alone... The Sorting Hat is, according to itself, never wrong, so I believe that based on Harry's qualities alone he could very well have been put in Slytherin... The hat saw something in him and wanted him there... I'm not sayng Harry shouldn't have been in Gryffindor; he has qualities to suit him there as well. But, he could also have been in Slytherin.. The Hat actually repeats itself when Harry asks it again in CoS...He would have done well in Slytherin! Very intriguing! Berit From mookie1552 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 21:31:26 2003 From: mookie1552 at aol.com (Jennifer) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:31:26 -0000 Subject: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84853 Lily's parents were muggles, so their deaths are hard to account for in terms of VWI, but they loved Lily and were proud of her, and Dumbledore would certainly have placed Harry in their keeping if they were alive. Jennifer: Do we know that Lily's parents were muggles? In some discussions a few weeks ago, we were surmising the magical possiblities of Dudley and Petunia. Some people believe that Lily is trying to squash the magic out of Dudley because Lily wouldn't be able to stand her own flesh and blood as a wizard, something she hates more than anything else. But I believe that Petunia is a wizard, rather want-to-be- wizard. Personally, I think that Petunia is a squib and that her family was a modest wizarding family way back. Petunia was jealous of her sister why? Because she had the magic and was welcomed to Hogwarts. Her parents were proud and happy because they only got a squib with her. Her hatred of the wizarding world stems from the fact that Petunia was denied a great gift. I base my theory on Dementors. When the Dementor attacked Dudley, he could not see them because Muggles can not see Dementors. But Mrs. Figg could because she is a squib. At the end of OoP we learned that Petunia is knowledgable of Dementors. As a squib she would be able to see them and know of their horror. If her family were muggles the Evans family would know nothing of any magic prior to Lily going off the school and I'm sure that Petunia severed all magical ties with her sister. When they did see each other, I'm sure they were not discussing Dementors and blast ended screwts. Thus Petunia would not have learned of them from Lily. Petunia is a squib from a wizarding family not a muggle one. Thus I believe that her family were wizards and still do hold some important mystery in their death. From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Wed Nov 12 21:48:31 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:48:31 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Why Ravenclaw? was, Re: Does the sorting hat sort? References: Message-ID: <002201c3a966$b8852e00$2ef51d43@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84854 > Cheekyweebisom: > First of all, I want to say that I really enjoyed your entire post. > I even agreed with most of it! How rare! Now, on to my response: Iggy here: *grin* I hope you're saying that it's rare for you to agree with all of a post, rather than anyone almost agreeing with all of one of *my* posts. = ) Thanks for the positive feedback, btw... > Cheekyweebisom: > I really like your analysis of Luna. *remainder of paragraph snipped* Iggy here: Thanks. Actually, I am a big fan of mythology and folklore, particularly the Greco-Roman, the Norse, and the Native American styles. Ravens are usually portrayed in many old myths as being wise, intelligent, and prophetic at times... adding in the tickster aspect when you get mostly to the Native American lore. The supposed source of this knowledge and wisdom is wide and varied, often depending on the folklore you're dealing with. Most tend to point out that ravens and crows are eveywhere, and that they see things most don't because of this. There's also an aspect of their knowledge that is supposedly gained from seeing crows and ravens pluck the eyes of the dead from the aftermath of battle. Legend had it that ravens did this because, with consuming the eye, you also gained the knowledge of everything those eyes witnessed. (This is most predominant in Norse myths... partly because they were often in battle, and partly because Odin had two crows/ravens that were his constant companions and spies.) This is how I see Ravenclaw House as being... They focus more on the intelectuall and studious nature, yet every once in a while, the trickster pops his head up and says "Remember, I belong here too..." A trickster, to me and to a lot of lores, isn't always the one who plays pranks on other people or causes trouble. They can also be the ones who are wise enough to see the folly of others being too serious, they have wisdom that comes from being able to laugh at themselves as well as others, and they often guide others into situations where being too serious or driven narrows the mind to the point where that person will get into trouble. This is the way the Raven works. (Coyote, on the other hand, works in a much different way, but with similar lessons. Trust me, I know... all too well. *sigh*) I do not see Rowena Ravenclaw as being stuffy and overly serious. I see her as being more like Professor Flitwick who, in my mind, is a perfect Head of Ravenclaw. He's very knowledgable, adept at what he does, has hidden talents, has an often hidden wisdom, but he can also laugh at things around him, appreciate a good prank, and enjoys the simple things... like a nice Shirly Temple... As the saying goes: "All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy." Anyone who's truly intelligent and wise understands thay play is at least as important as work. > Cheekyweebisom: > Your post made me start thinking about another Ravenclaw, though. > That's right -- Cho. *rest of paragraph snipped* Iggy here: Ummmm... to be entirely honest, I haven't the foggiest idea either. I have a couple of possible ideas, however... First, she picked up on lessons in the DA quickly enough, and was one of the few who apparently could create a corporeal Patronus. (Which, as an interesting side, makes me wonder what Neville's Patronus would be...) This indicates a reasonably strong mind. She also possibly works hard when we can't see it. As for her silly, weepy, girl aspect... well, not only is she a girl going through puberty (and, ladies, weren't you a bit weepy and silly when *your* hormones were flooding your system... even if you are intelligent?) but is also still trying to deal with the fact that Cedric died, yet she also had strong, mixed feelings for Harry... That's enough to scramble anyone's cranial eggs... I hate to say the last option I can come up with... since I don't agree with the stereotyping stuff (which is pretty evident in my posts lately...) but she *is* Asian... and there's the classic thing of Asian students being very intelligent and well learned... (A classic joke reply to anyone in the US finding out an Asian is in one of their classes is "Well, there goes the grading curve.") Other than that, I hope that Cho shows us why she's in Ravenclaw within the next two books, or I'd be inclined to chalk up a miss on the Sorting Hat's part... Iggy McSnurd From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 22:17:22 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:17:22 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84855 > Kneasy: >> > Outbreaks of outrage occur every few weeks. All it takes is for > > some-one to decry Elvish degradation or sexism or gender typing or > > racism and the pot starts boiling again. But strangely, > other books don't get the same treatment. When comparisons are made > to other fantasies, fictions or even what some may consider > philosophical or religious source books the same standards don't > seem to be applied. > > Laura: > > There is, in fact, critique being written that does that very > thing. At Nimbus, any number of the presentations made overt > comparisons between HP and LOTR, Ursula LeGuin, Pullman and other > fantasy/scifi series. We don't get too in depth with that on this > list because of the habit we all have of sliding into OT discussion, > but I'm sure that many listees would love to get into detailed > literary comparison. > Kneasy, I don't know about any of the other authors Laura mentioned, but a quick search of Google groups will show you that charges of racism and sexism are repeatedly being hurled at Tolkien for making Orcs innately evil and Dwarves (except Gimli) a little too interested in gold and jewels while Elves are (ostensibly) innately good. JKR is far from the only author who is subjected to this sort of criticism (in the ordinary sense of the word). In JKR's case, it's self-evident that she's opposed to racism and discrimination against people who are different in any way (with the possible exception of the giants, who do seem rather subhuman--Hagrid and Madame Maxime as half-giants not included). I for one think her politics are a little too transparent and that the House Elf business comes a bit too close to allegory (it seems too closely patterned on American pre-Civil War slavery just as Voldemort is patterned in part on Hitler, by JKR's own admission). In any case, we can refute the charges of stereotyping simply by looking at the House Elves. Dobby, Winky, and Kreacher may all speak like variations of Gollum, but they have distinctly different personalities. In fact, the only two characters who seem to me to be stereotyped are Crabbe and Goyle, who are virtually indistinguishable except for their heights and haircuts, and I confess that it would be hard to avoid stereotyping in their case. They're intended as "flat," "static" characters in any case, to borrow E.M. Forster's terms. Their sole purpose is to bolster Draco in his role as bully without having any real identity themselves. I hope this helps to cheer you up. That was my intention, anyway. Carol From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Wed Nov 12 22:34:39 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 17:34:39 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD's affection for Snape, was:(Re:Snape Theory right here... Message-ID: <126.343f3eff.2ce40f7f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84856 ? Arya wrote: > I think it was D-dore who taught ? Snape. Now, we can see from Harry- > Snape ? Occlumendcy lessons that if one is open to see, then ? an awful > lot of insight can be gained about a ? person while teaching them this > art. I tend now ? to think that D-dore's affection and trust of Snape > ? is directly related to the likelyhood that Dumbledore ? once soent > hours pointing his wand at Snape and ? crying, "Legilimens!", making > Snape gasp upon ? the floor as he shared his own agonizing childhood ? > and past life. > then Lauri: Interesting theory, Arya. I ? suppose I thought Snape learnt occlumency the same ? place he learnt all the curses he knew before coming ? to Hogwarts. (According to Sirius in the cave in GOF.) ? One question for you: do we have canon for DD feeling ? actual *affection* for Snape? Have we seen him ? behave affectionately toward him? Yes, in Every Book ? DD tells someone, "I trust Severus Snape." But ? Dumbledore trusts people he should not trust, in every ? book. (Erm... primarily DADA teachers.) ? Considering those two facts - that DD continually says ? he trusts Snape, and that DD trusts too much - make ? me very suspicious of Snape. (As JKR means me to ? be, no doubt, LOL.) Lauri Now me ( Tonks ) : I had the feeling that Legilemency was a natural gift, thus those who possessed it would have to have some ability with Occlumency. Occlumency being the ability to block Legilimency would be something that others could learn, but since Snape and Dumbledore are Legilemens, I always assumed that they had come by their gifts naturally and never thought of the possibility of DD teaching Snape. Since DD was headmaster during Snape's time, ( I think this has been establishes both here and in canon- don't shoot me if I am wrong, not working on a lot of sleep here) would he really have taught Snape? It doesn't fit for me. I yield to agree with Lauri that Snape learned his abilities before coming to Hogwarts. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 21:33:14 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:33:14 -0000 Subject: How many Prefects are there? In-Reply-To: <000901c3a98d$5fba3eb0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84857 Robert Jones asked: > Nothing in the plot turns on this question, but I would still like > to know the answer: how many Prefects are there? I mean, is being > appointed a Prefect a one-year gig, or do those who are appointed > Prefects in their fifth year remain Prefects in their sixth and > seventh years? In other words, at any given time, are there *two* > Gryffindor Prefects or *six*? Maybe someone who knows the British > boarding school system can shed some light on this. Kathryn Cawte: > Well I think that once a prefect you stay one till you leave school (barring > any major trouble) but I think there's a third option. I think it's entirely > possible that as well as the two prefects appointed in the fifth year there > are more appointed in either the sixth or seventh year - so you would have > the six you mentioned plus a few more. I think even going with the minimum > size estimates for Hogwarts (approx 300) 24 prefect (possibly plus head girl > and boy) is too few. It wouldn't be necessary to appoint new prefects in sixth and seventh year if the former fifth-year prefects held onto their positions. That would still, as you say, be 24 prefects (in most cases the Head Boy and Girl would be among the 24), but I don't see why that wouldn't be sufficient. As far as we know, there are only about a dozen teachers. (I think Rowling's 1,000 students quote is a Flint. There's no evidence for more than about 40 students per year = 280 students total. In that case, nearly nine percent of the students would be prefects. Fortunately they're not all as caught up in their duties as Percy, or that would be about eight percent too many.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 21:48:59 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:48:59 -0000 Subject: How many Prefects are there? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84858 "Robert Jones" wrote: > > Nothing in the plot turns on this question, but I would still like > > to know the answer: how many Prefects are there? > Finduilas wrote: > I think the answer is most likely to be that there are two prefects > from each house at Hogwarts per year. I think so because I remember > Percy, one of the Gryffindor Prefects, leading the first years, > including Harry, up to Gryffindor Tower after the start of term feast > in PS/SS. > Therefore I assume that when one is chosen as a prefect, he will stay > a prefect unless he acts so irresponsibly and with severe > consequences (for example endangering others) that he is inacceptable > and clearly the wrong person for this job. But as I daresay > Dumbledore has got his reasons for appointing prefects - even in > Draco's case I hope there's some urge to socialize the boy or to come > to know how he will handle a certain amount of power given to him > behind it - I don't think this will be the case very often so that > usually prefects will be in this position from their fifth- to their > seventh year. > Additionally, I think when Sirius told Harry in OotP that "Remus got > the badge" (to 'tame' his bullying Marauder friends), it is likely > Dumbledore thought he could rather manage that during three terms > instead of only one. I agree that prefects are appointed in their fifth year and retain their positions in sixth and seventh years (I think we'll see this confirmed in Book 6 with Ron, Hermione, and Draco), but I'm not sure that Dumbledore alone is responsible for choosing the prefects. It does seem that the final decision is his (last chapter of OotP), but I imagine he takes into account the opinions of the heads of houses. Surely he consulted with McGonagall before making Ron rather than Harry a prefect, and I think he and Snape must have their reasons for giving the position to Draco (unless he and his thugs are the only Slytherin boys in their year, in which case he'd win the badge by default). Carol From navarro198 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 12 23:08:20 2003 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 23:08:20 -0000 Subject: Another sleeping dragon?(Re: Never tickle a sleeping dragon ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84859 Iris wrote: "Draco dormiens nunquam titilandus". By the way, Draco is not the only character we can tie up with the dragon. There's also his favourite teacher, Severus Snape. I remember that in Cos JKR wrote this: "Deliberately causing mayhem in Snape's Potions class was about as safe as poking a SLEEPING DRAGON in the eye." (Bloomsbury, p 142). It was in Book 2. In Book 4, we learned that dear Severus was formerly a Death Eater. We don't know how or why he decided to join Voldemort's gang. In Draco's case, the motivation is more obvious. Will Draco follow the example of his teacher? He has a good reason: Harry is his father's enemy. Or is Snape another "Draco dormiens", i.e, is he playing a double game? Will he turn out to be "a Devil's Snape", working for Voldemort in order to corner Harry and hand him over to the Dark Lord? What a bastard he would be Bookworm: You bring up an interesting point. We can also look at it a different way. Draco obviously admires Snape. IF we trust Dumbledore's belief in Snape, Draco has both an evil example (his father) and a `good' example to follow. Which will he choose? Once again we see the theme of free will and personal choice at work here. Ravenclaw Bookworm From drednort at alphalink.com.au Wed Nov 12 23:12:42 2003 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 10:12:42 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] How many Prefects are there? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3FB3591A.26826.2AAC08F@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 84860 On 12 Nov 2003 at 17:37, Robert Jones wrote: > Nothing in the plot turns on this question, but I would still like > to know the answer: how many Prefects are there? I mean, is being > appointed a Prefect a one-year gig, or do those who are appointed > Prefects in their fifth year remain Prefects in their sixth and > seventh years? In other words, at any given time, are there *two* > Gryffindor Prefects or *six*? Maybe someone who knows the British > boarding school system can shed some light on this. There's no single system - every school does it slightly differently. My impression (as someone who was a Prefect in a very British style school in Australia) is that there are most likely 6 in each house - those who become Prefects in fifth year, remain prefects in 6th year and 7th year. BTW - I've made this offer on HPOT, so I'll make it here as well. I've come across something some people on this list might be interested in seeing. I've been reading a book about the 'Six Great Schools' of Victoria, one of which I attended - it contains a rather interesting subchapter talking about Prefects, what they do, their attitudes, duties, privileges, etc. These six schools were very much (and still are to a great extent) on a British model, and given we've had discussions on this on the list, I thought some people might like to see it - it's short enough (about five or six pages in a 300 page book) that it can be quoted without creating Copyright problems. I don't intend to send it here - it's a little long for that - but I'd be happy to send a copy to anyone who wants to see it. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From drednort at alphalink.com.au Wed Nov 12 23:14:50 2003 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 10:14:50 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: How many Prefects are there? In-Reply-To: References: <000901c3a98d$5fba3eb0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: <3FB3599A.1717.2ACB462@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 84861 On 12 Nov 2003 at 18:55, ghinghapuss wrote: > FYI: I don't know of any school in Britain who gives out different > school uniforms to different houses. All kids wear the same colour > ties, jumpers, scarves, hats etc. In the school colours. In my case > it was Green and Grey, which is why I'm so fond of Slytherin I > expect. No indication of House allegiance is show on the body. I know of at least one British school where they did wear (not sure if they still do, because the person I know who went there left school eleven years ago) ties in their house colour as part of a common school uniform. So at least some schools did it. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 22:26:51 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:26:51 -0000 Subject: Teacher stereotypes (love them!) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84862 JJpandy wrote: > As a teacher myself, I love JKR's uses of teacher stereotypes to > create a balanced school faculty. McGonagal is the strict, but fair > teacher. Snape is mean and plays favorites. Binn is dull and > monotonous. Flitwick, Hooch and Sprout are good teachers, probably > remembered fondly by those students who favored those particular > subjects. Lupin was kind, knowledgable, and respected (except by > Slytherins). Mad-eye Moody (or who we thought was Moody)was scary, > yet entertaining at the same time. Dumbledore is the beloved > Headmaster/Principal. Hagrid is the first-time teacher whose heart is > in the right place even if his lesson-planning skills need work. sera said: > I absolutely agree. When I read "Philosopher's Stone" again last week, > I thought: "Wow, Snape is just like that mean maths teacher you had in > 10th grade" or "Yes, I know a McGonagall myself". Rowling creates > stereotypes. But that we actually find those in real life just shows > how much our society is build upon certain, er, stereotypes. When I > think back to my school days, I can certainly name the "good" and the > "Bad" teachers, the "mean" and the "nice" ones, and I could compare > them to Hogwarts' teachers. I think you're missing a key distinction between "type" and "stereotype." In my view, McGonagall and Snape are variations on the stern teacher type who can control a class without effort, but they are also distinct individuals, especially Snape, who is the focus of so much discussion precisely because he defies our expectations so frequently. A stereotypical character, on the other hand, speaks and acts predictably. I mentioned Crabbe and Goyle earlier as the only characters I could think of who could accurately be labeled stereotypes. As an afterthought I could add Filch, the malicious caretaker, to that list, along with Peeves (not that I've encountered many poltergeists in the literature I read, but he's pretty predictable). But Snape and McGonagall are real to readers precisely because they go far beyond the bounds of the "mean" or "stern" teacher we expect to encounter in a book generally regarded as children's literature. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 22:40:36 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:40:36 -0000 Subject: Avada Kedavra Meaning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84863 Troels wrote: > Another question that has bugged me a bit is whether there is > an actual, significant, difference between the phrases 'Prior > Incantato' and 'Priori Incantatem' - I originally thought that > the latter was plural, but both are singular. > > Any help on those two would certainly be much appreciated. Geoff responded: > Without having a Latin dictionary to hand, I have a feeling > that "Prior Incantato" is bad Latin. Prior seems to lack a case > ending. Incantato smacks of a Dative to me. The second "looks" more > correct to me though Incantatem seems like an Accusative. > > There are other examples in HP of possible misuse. The curses should, > I think have a "-us" (Nominative) ending; Cruciatus, Imperius etc. > whereas the command word is a Vocative; Crucio, Imperio etc. > > I'll have to see if I can root out a Latin primer. It's a long, long > timne since I did Latin but it was a fine language to learn - gives > you and enormous insight into linguistics and other languages with a > case structure - like German for example. My Latin is shaky, too, and it's been a very long time since I read any, but I was thinking that the -o in "Crucio," "Imperio," etc., was a verb ending indicating a first-person "doer," as in "amo" (I love). So "imperio" would be "I command." (A vocative is a noun or name used in direct address, e.g., "Brute" for "Brutus," which seems inappropriate here.) In any case, I think we're dealing with two different parts of speech here, nouns and verbs. In other words, the spoken form of the curse is a verb, the name of the curse is a noun. I agree that -em looks like an accusative form, which seems odd, but -us in "Cruciatus" and "Imperius" is nominative, as we would expect. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 23:03:50 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 23:03:50 -0000 Subject: Heir of other houses In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031112193759.00bc79c0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84864 Troels wrote: > The conflict between Gryffindor and Slytherin seems to me to > represent, to some extend, the conflict between good and evil > in the magical world. > The conflict between good and evil might be said to, in the > magical world, be fought by proxy through the inter-house > conflict. In that respect the cause of Gryffindor might be > just that; to oppose Slytherin. To the extend that there is > an "Heir of Slytherin" the Gryffindor (current or old) who > opposes this Slytherin can be said to inherit the role of the > house founder; that of opposing Slytherin. Surely this view is an oversimplification. For one thing, it leaves out Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff, which would also be "good" in this view. Look at Cedric Diggory, eulogized by Dumbledore and mourned by the whole school--even the Slytherins. Look at Dolores Umbridge, who is indisputably evil, but neither a Slytherin nor a Death Eater. Look at Dumbledore's words to Harry (I think they're DD's--correct me if I'm wrong): "The world is not divided into good people and Death Eaters." That being the case, the WW is not divided into good people and Slytherins, either. Snape, the Slytherin, is not wholly evil; Sirius and James, the (highly probable) Gryffindors, are not wholly good. Look at the words of the Sorting Hat in OotP: Godric Gryffindor and Salazar Slytherin were the best of friends. The conflict between them brought division to the school. The solution is not for the Slytherins to side with the Death Eaters and LV against the rest of the school but for the houses to unite and act as one to resist evil. I'm paraphrasing, I'm sorry, but I'm sure someone can find the exact quote. The idea of an heir of any house now that the memory of Tom Riddle has been exorcised from the Chamber of Secrets and his diary destroyed is inimical to this vision of unity. (I don't think it will happen, at least not till a lot of people have been killed in VW2, but nevertheless it's the ideal JKR would like to see achieved: Not just the houses but the various species of thinking beings from House Elves to Centaurs united against evil. Somehow the idea of Slytherin as the epitome of evil just doesn't fit this vision. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 23:32:57 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 23:32:57 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84865 > Cheekyweebisom said: the Hat itself is a Slytherin -- very cunning. Didn't the hat originally belong to Godric Gryffindor? It seems to be under some sort of Legilimency spell that enables it to read thoughts or feelings, possibly like those we see in the Pensieve, but it also has the ability to interpret those feelings and choose what it thinks is the proper house for each student based on those feelings. As for cunning, I think shrewdness is a more apt description. In any case, the hat doesn't seem to favor any particular house. Also take note of the Sorting Hat's song in Book 5. Oddly and ironically, it's starting to disapprove of its own reason for being, the sorting of the students into houses. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 23:20:24 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 23:20:24 -0000 Subject: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: <003701c3a950$e938d6c0$84e66151@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84866 Jen asked: > Does anyone have any suspicions to how Lily's or James' parents > died. It was close after graduating from Hogwarts. Their parents > would not have been old because Lily and James were in their late > teens, early twenties when they died. Do you think it has to do with > LV????? I do... I know JKR has not made this an issue but maybe > Harry's grandparents' history will have some light shed on it, or > Petunia will hold the key or spill the beans. Fred replied: > Let's suppose > > 1. Following the "worst memory" incident, Severus Snape reflects on Lily's > action and her kindness to him. No girl's ever been kind to him before, > they've all been like the "broomstick girl" in the other memory. He develops > a crush on her (or possibly an obsession). > > 2. Lily, of course, starts going out with Severus's worst enemy, and, later, > marries him. > > 3. Severus leaves school, signs up for the DEs and takes the Dark Mark. > > (the last two aren't supposition, of course, they're canon) > > 4. During the Voldemort era, Severus is either guilty of, or at least > complicit in, killing both the Potters and the Evanses. Killing the Potters > is his way of getting back not only at James, but also Sirius. Killing the > Evanses is his way of getting back at Lily for rejecting him (and hey, you > don't need an excuse for killing a muggle or two...) I seriously doubt that Dumbledore would have hired Snape under these circumstances, much less allowed Harry to be alone in his presence for occlumency lessons. I think it's much more likely that the reason Dumbledore trusts Snape is that Snape somehow warned his enemy, James Potter, that Voldemort was looking for him or that one of his friends (he would not have known who) was about to betray him. Dumbledore has stated repeatedly that he trusts Snape, and he would not do so unless Snape had done something to prove that he was truly opposed to the Death Eaters. And remember, he was already spying for Dumbledore for a year before the Potters were killed. It is extremely unlikely that he was involved in their deaths except, perhaps, to warn them. You're also forgetting that he owes James Potter a life debt. Killing him or being involved in his death would be some sort of unforgiveable sin that could not escape detection by Dumbledore. As for the Evanses, it's unclear to me why they would have been killed at all. Voldemort hesitated to kill Lily. He had no reason whatever to kill her parents, or to seek them out in the muggle world. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 12 23:44:57 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 23:44:57 -0000 Subject: Halfblood v. Pureblood In-Reply-To: <1eb.1308815a.2ce3f476@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84867 Melissa wrote: > I tend to think of Harry as a Full-blood rather than Half-blood. The > difference IMO between Full and Half is that Harry has two magical parents. A true > halfblood (also IMO) is someone with one magical and one muggle parent > (examples include Seamus, Tonks and even Voldemort himself.) All had one magical > parent (their mums coincidentally enough) and one muggle parent. Whereas > Pure-bloods are families like the Weasleys, Longbottoms or Malfoys. Not a drop of > muggle blood anywhere in their veins. > > Melissa Dumbledore himself distinguished between Harry, the half blood, and Neville, the pure blood, and pointed out that Voldemort went after Harry, the one who was more like himself (and therefore, in his view, the greater danger?). The memory of young Tom Riddle also compared Harry with himself in the basilisk scene in CS: "You'll be with your muggle mother soon, Potter!" or something like that. The distinction is important to Voldemort and Dumbledore and therefore to us as readers. Harry had two wizard parents but one was muggle-born; therefore, he's somewhere between a pure blood like Sirius or Draco and a "mudblood" like Hermione. "Halfblood" is the only category that fits. Carol From Zarleycat at aol.com Thu Nov 13 00:06:44 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 00:06:44 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84868 Marina wrote: > > I suppose it's theoretically possible, but what would be the point? > JKR's surprises are never gratuitous -- they always serve an > important function in the story, either by furthering the plot or by > affecting characterization. What, exactly, do you think JKR would > achieve by suddenly going, "Hah! Fooled you!" at the tail end of the > series? Whatever it is, it would have to be something incredibly > bangy and important in order to justify 5-odd books' worth of > carefully planted misdirection, but what the heck could it be? > Making Harry reevaluate his image of his father? We just had that > with the Pensieve scene in OOP. In fact, that scene would've been > the perfect opportunity to spring the surprise on us, and the fact > that JRK didn't indicates to me that she's never going to. Having > shown us James as an arrogant, bullying jerk, throwing in "Oh, and > he wasn't a Gryffindor, either" two books later would be repetetive > and anticlimactic, IMO. > > Marina > rusalka at i... Well, it's not like JKR never makes the same point twice. I'm thinking of the old "death is sudden and arbitrary" deal. We've seen it with both Cedric and Sirius, no? Maybe the point in finally revealing James, etal to be in Slytherin (if indeed they are Slyths) is to show that not all Slytherins grow up to be horrible, evil, DEs. Thus, Harry not only has to deal with adjusting his images of James and Sirius (in OoP) as not being pure as the driven snow. But, now that he's seen that, he gets hit in Book 6 or 7 with the realization that they were in Slytherin, but opted not to follow the route to Voldemort that many Slytherins chose. I'm still of two minds about this. JKR is still being very coy about James' house, IMO. Marianne From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 00:08:25 2003 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 00:08:25 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna Oh my! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84869 For Harry, you have the Big Three, post OotP, as the Harry/Tonks folks seem a distinct minority. All three of these have their merits and their problems, with the Tonks camp facing a few more problems than do the devotees of these three principal Harry-SHIPs. In my opinion, the Tonks camp isn't dealing well with the fact that Tonks really IS that much older than Harry. She is at least 21 years old, and possibly 25 or older. Why do I say this? Well, assume she graduated from Hogwarts at 18, then spent three years in training as an Auror, and you get 21. We are told that she is a "new" auror, so she can't be too far from completing her training, but from my own experience I know that folks can spend years as "new" whatevers, often graduating from that perception only by dint of grey hairs or some number of newer newbies arriving on the scene. As we know that nobody has been accepted for auror training for more than three years, there can't be too many newer aurors to displace Tonks as a "rookie." Further, in a Wizarding World where considerable antiquity is not only attainable but relatively routine, the number of years required to earn "veteran" status is likely greater than in the Muggle World. Now, dealing with a putative age of 21 for Tonks, a six year difference in age isn't NECESSARILY that much, but in this case we have to consider just which six years we are speaking about. In OotP, these years are the 15-to-21 years. Frankly, up until the age of 21 to 28, most young people change a great deal. Viewing these changes can be a bit like watching time-lapse photographic sequences. Anyway, for a Harry-Tonks ship to work, Tonks will have to remain available until Harry is at least 21, possibly older, before Harry is likely to be relatively stable in personal development, and thus a candidate for serious interest of the matrimonal sort ... which is, after all, where SHIPping meets handling. This means Tonks will be at least 28, and perhaps well into her 30's before settling into something serious with Harry. I have a hard time believing this practical, even from an epilogue's perspective. With regard to Hermione, I have a serious problem with the Ron- Hermione match-up. First off, JKR has a penchant for disinformation ... well, maybe not "dis"-information so much as laying so many trails that picking the right one becomes a matter more of guesswork than of logic and deduction. JKR has dropped some comments about more "chemistry" between Ron and Hermione than between Harry and Hermione, which, given JKR's aforementioned penchant, makes me more than a little suspicious of the RH factor. But, there is a more basic reason for not thinking this a good match. I spent several years as a staff member in a large residence Hall on an American university campus, and saw a good deal of "chemistry" of all sorts. Romantic chemistry was definitely one of them. From my experience, the chemistry between Ron and Hermione might well lead to some romantic fireworks, but not to a stable, healthy relationship. The old "opposites attract" theory just doesn't work, when it comes to long-term relationships. What makes for stable relationships is common beliefs and values, along with common experience, leavened with a great deal of respect. Ron and Hermione are too often at opposite poles of interest, beliefs and values, and both have almost routinely expressed impatience with, and even contempt for, the others views. Sure, both are going to change dramatically in the next two installments, but I don't see them drawing fundamentally closer on core principals in such a way that Ron will respect Hermione's causes (and activism in those causes) and Hermione will respect Ron's indifference for such. So, I see Ron and Hermione as "bad medicine" (Disagree if you will, but spare me the flames. JKR will settle this all in the end, and until then all reasoned opinions are of approximately equal value), which I think reduces one of the objections to a Harry-Hermione match- up. Now, this match has its problems, but Harry and Hermione are much closer when it comes to values than are Ron and Hermione. Harry sees the inherent evil in house-elf servitude, even if he isn't as interested in trying to immediately remedy it, and even see that many of the house elves LIKE this arrangement ... even if he doesn't understand WHY they would. Ron just doesn't see what Hermione is upset about, and is VERY patronizing about it. (OK, so Harry doesn't want to be bothered with this sort of thing, but then he has had some rather serious issues to deal with, hasn't he ...) Harry seems to have greater respect for Hermione as a person than does Ron, who seems to respect her encyclopedic knowledge more than her person. The biggest problems I see with this match-up are these: friendship and distraction. By "friendship" I refer to the real barrier to the development of romantic interests when dealing with a friend. As for distraction, well, wouldn't you be distracted if people really were plotting to murder you, and your whole World was dependent upon your beating them to the punch? If Harry survives, the distraction that is his prophecied fate will disappear. Enough said. Time can, and I believe will, eliminate this obstacle. A peculiarity noted in Israeli kibbutzes is that boys and girls raised together in the same kibbutz almost never marry one another. There is also a fair bit of documentation about friends trying to be romantic feeling it all "incestuous" in a very basic way. However, those relationships that make it past that barrier tend to be extremely strong, stable and rewarding. So, is a Harry-Hermione SHIP possible? I think so ... but that doesn't make it a given. For one thing, it is JKR's story, and she'll have her characters do what she decides, not what we decide. My only hope is that whatever JKR does with regard to the R/H v H/H "controversy" is in the end both believable and consistent with her tendency to realism. She will have a hard time convincing me that R/H works, in the long run, if those two don't move significantly towards each other in terms of both values and respect for person. Likewise with an H/H match, she will have to show why they can make it past a very solid friendship to romance. The Ginny-Harry match has some real charm to it. Ginny is growing as a person, with real strength and independence. Yet, it is a little on the "pat" side, and suffers from the fact that Harry is now effectively a Weasley. With a few more years there could well be the same kind of problem with a feeling of "incestuousness" that the H/H match must conquer. I know there are plenty of reasons given by both the R/H and H/H crowds why their causes are just and the others' idiotic, but really, both of these ARE within the realm of possibility, especially in a fictional world where an author can make anything he or she wishes happen, provided the necessary foundation is laid to make the result believable to the readers. Luna is a late comer, and we really don't know that much about her. Harry certainly thinks her odd, but has real sympathy and respect for her. I don't see that we have much else than this to base a strong SHIP thesis on, but isn't that like much of life? Who knows why we fall in love with any one person, and not with another? With all the changes that are both possible for and certain to arise in a group of mid-teens, a Harry-Luna match is quite as plausible as many another ... just as the H/H and H/G matches are. As for whether JKR will build a match for Harry, I doubt it, but it certainly isn't impossible. I don't see her manufacturing some Valkyrie, super-model or such, as JKR is so very fond of realism in her portrayals of central characters, and particularly of Harry's emotional responses. He is still in school, so "the one," if she is to exist at all, will most likely come from the World as Harry knows it now ... if it is to occur within the framework of the present story. I won't count out Cho, or any number of other existing characters for the role of Harry's Great Passion, as again, fifteen- year-olds are going to change a great deal. BUT(!!!), my personal beliefs is that the final SHIPs are matters for the epilogue, especially for Harry. I see no reason why Harry MUST find love while he is still the fulcrum of fate. At least where I live, most people don't find their mates until either in college or into their careers. There certainly are exceptions, but I won't be surprised if a complete unknown shows up in the epilogue, and we are left with little idea of who this person is, and little to explain why. So long as the body of JKR's tale is confined to Harry's Hogwarts years, I see no reason for us to insist that resolutions for such important personal matters for the main characters be resolved before the epilogue. I think JKR can paint a convincing H/H, H/G or H/L SHIP within the confines of Hogwarts ... but don't be surprised if you don't get what you want and expect. From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Wed Nov 12 23:39:31 2003 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:39:31 +1300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Another Theory was:Snape and Harry (Re:Snape Theory right here...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20031113123134.00ac4bd0@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 84870 At 20:16 12/11/2003 +0000, you wrote: >Arya wrote > >I've kind of been fostering the theory that since Dumbledore is an >Occlumens and Snape is an Occlumens and someone had to teach Snape >how to do this....(hmm, someone say perhaps who may want to help >Snape be capable of lying in Volde's presence in order to spy?)...and >I think it was D-dore who taught Snape. Now, we can see from Harry- >Snape Occlumendcy lessons that if one is open to see, then an awful >lot of insight can be gained about a person while teaching them this >art. I tend now to think that D-dore's affection and trust of Snape >is directly related to the likelyhood that Dumbledore once soent >hours pointing his wand at Snape and crying, "Legilimens!", making >Snape gasp upon the floor as he shared his own agonizing childhood Tanya here. While I have not figured out the connection in all of this. I can see how that theory would work. For the life of me, I have trouble accepting that LV would want his DE's to be able to block him out, how would he know who among them was trustworthy? Then again, it might have been used to block out the enemy, but then, it would be a problem for LV still. If Snape learnt Occlumency just prior to spying, then LV's entries into his head before that would show little change afterwards as Snape could then block him. It would have to be done so there was no suspicion. Not only would Snape be able to verbally lie, but his demeanor and such would have to be a perfect poker face, no tremors etc. From what I have read, LV is good at smelling guilt. I assume he can do the same with fear. Tanya From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Thu Nov 13 00:31:56 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:31:56 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Avada Kedavra Meaning Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84871 Has Latin Dictionary Handy :) : It has been a long time since I have thought 'in Latin', so... here goes. The closest word to Avada I can find in my Latin Dictionary ( which I had to retrieve from the cellar since it has been packed there since University) is: Avida, which translated to english means Eager, insatiable, greedy, gluttonous, voracious. Kadava: there are very few 'K' words in the ancient language, so I looked under 'C' and found Cado- v. to be slain, to die, to fall, etc.`also, to decay, to vainish, to cease. to delve a bit further in reply to Carol, Geoff, and Troels, JKR doesn't always use the proper 'Latin' endings to words to show structural placement and meaning. Rather, I actually find myself looking at some of them as Italian derivation. ( albeit somewhat similar in sound, pronunciation, and meaning) Sadly I studied Latin for 8 years, and can only remember 'Omnes Gallia divide en tres partes' and a few other random phrases. -Tonks, hoping she was helpful [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sydpad at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 00:42:43 2003 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 00:42:43 -0000 Subject: Another Theory was:Snape and Harry (Re:Snape Theory right here...) In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20031113123134.00ac4bd0@pop3.xtra.co.nz> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84872 > >Arya wrote > > > >I've kind of been fostering the theory that since Dumbledore is an > >Occlumens and Snape is an Occlumens and someone had to teach Snape > >how to do this....(hmm, someone say perhaps who may want to help > >Snape be capable of lying in Volde's presence in order to spy?)...and > >I think it was D-dore who taught Snape. > Tanya here. > > While I have not figured out the connection in all of this. I can see how > that > theory would work. For the life of me, I have trouble accepting that LV would > want his DE's to be able to block him out, how would he know who among > them was trustworthy? Well, just to round out every possible theory, I think Snape was largely self-taught. If, when he started spying, he had started exhibiting strange blocks in his mind out of nowhere, he would have been toast. And it would have been awfully hard for D-dore to go turn him out as an Occulomens subtle enough to deceive V-mort from a standing start. I think Dumbledore and Voldemort both refined his technique, but he already knew a lot more than he let on to either of them. I'm reckoning he picked it up to protect himself from his dad. Sydney From nibleswik at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 00:39:43 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 00:39:43 -0000 Subject: How the houses overlap, was: Re: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84873 > > Based on qualities alone, I think Harry would still have been a > > Gryffindor. Berit: And on the question of Harry's qualities alone... The Sorting > Hat is, according to itself, never wrong, so I believe that based > on Harry's qualities alone he could very well have been put in >Slytherin... The hat saw something in him and wanted him there... > The Hat actually repeats itself when Harry asks it again in > CoS...He would have done well in Slytherin! Very intriguing! Me (Cheekyweebisom): Hmm. I think my original comment must have been unclear. I'll explain just what I meant. First, when I said the Hat was a Slytherin, I didn't mean it literally. :) I was joking. As for the rest of it, this is what I was trying to say: The Hat is influenced greatly by the students' choices. A good example of this is Harry. Harry could have done well in either Gryffindor or Slytherin, but he chose Gryffindor. If the Hat placed students SOLELY on their qualities, without considering the students' wishes, we don't know that Harry would have necessarily ended up in Gryffindor. Yes, the Hat hinted at Slytherin to him, but that does not mean it would have placed him there. It could have said that to elicit a response from him; had he said, "Goody! Slytherin!", he'd have gone there, but since he said, "Not Slytherin", he went to Gryffindor. If it were going to place him simply on qualities, I think Gryffindor makes a lot more sense, as he's amazingly brave but tends to be (imho) quite the dunce. He's not cunning, though he is ambitious. Hence, I think he'd still have ended up in Gryffindor. Now, as to what the hat says in CoS, that's fine. "You would have done well in Slytherin" is not mutually exclusive with "you're a Gryffindor"; in fact, that quote perfectly illustrates my next point -- that the houses overlap. I do not believe there is the harsh division between them that the students like to think there is. This is yet another part of JKR's world that can be applied to the RW. Humans like categories. We like being able to go, "Oh, you're this, and you're not." But really, the fact that Harry really could have fared well in each house says something about how meaningful those barriers are. I think even Draco has Hufflepuff in him; we saw his loyalty to his father in OotP. Luna is brave, Hermione smart, Ron loyal, etc. Gred and Forge would have been excellent Slytherins; they're both ambitious, pureblooded, and cunning as can be. I believe the need for unified houses will become greater and greater in the last two books and worry that Harry's stubbornness and hatred of the Slytherins will hurt him. The houses are all different, but, I think, also all the same. Cheekyweebisom From t.forch at mail.dk Thu Nov 13 01:00:53 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:00:53 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Heir of other houses In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20031112193759.00bc79c0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031113012231.024caa10@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 84874 At 23:03 12-11-03 +0000, you wrote: >Troels wrote: > > The conflict between Gryffindor and Slytherin seems to me to > > represent, to some extend, the conflict between good and evil > > in the magical world. > > The conflict between good and evil might be said to, in the > > magical world, be fought by proxy through the inter-house > > conflict. In that respect the cause of Gryffindor might be > > just that; to oppose Slytherin. To the extend that there is > > an "Heir of Slytherin" the Gryffindor (current or old) who > > opposes this Slytherin can be said to inherit the role of the > > house founder; that of opposing Slytherin. > >Surely this view is an oversimplification. Of course it is an oversimplification - that's what it is all about, IMO. Discussing the trends must necessarily rely on generalities rather than specifics. In this case it is, however, very obvious that the primary conflict is between Gryffindor and Slytherin, and that these two houses represent the good and the evil aspects respectively. >For one thing, it leaves out Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff, which would >also be "good" in this view. No - they just are. Again that is obviously an oversimplification, but as houses they are neutral in the primary conflict, even if individual students aren't. Please note that I'm not speaking of my personal attitude towards the virtues of each house - that would be far more nuanced, but I rather speak of how the houses, as principles almost, place themselves with respect to the primary good vs. evil conflict in Potterverse. In that respect Gryffindor (despite Percy) does represent "Good" and Slytherin represents "Evil" (this doesn't put any contraints on the individual students - only on the mass of students as a whole). >Look at Dolores Umbridge, who is indisputably evil, but neither a >Slytherin nor a Death Eater. Do we have any evidence as to her house? (My OotP is on loan at the moment). >Look at Dumbledore's words to Harry (I think they're DD's--correct >me if I'm wrong): "The world is not divided into good people and >Death Eaters." That's Sirius saying it, but that doesn't matter. The world /is/ divided into good, evil and neutral people (no hard lines, I know, but sometimes the only way to speak of things is to simplify them), and that division is, however the individual members behave, represented by the four Hogwarts houses. Individual Slytherins are /mostly/ evil or at the very least despicable, while Gryffindors are /mostly/ noble and good. >Look at the words of the Sorting Hat in OotP: Godric Gryffindor and >Salazar Slytherin were the best of friends. But they did not remain friends, and thus >The conflict between them brought division to the school. Exactly! >The solution is not for the Slytherins to side with the Death >Eaters and LV against the rest of the school but for the houses to >unite and act as one to resist evil. And how does our heroic (Gryffindor) trio react to that? They think that it'd be OK with Hufflepuffs (who are usually on good terms with the Gryffindors anyway) and the Ravenclaws, but they have serious doubts about the Slytherins. The problem here is that Rowling presents a solution; the re-unification of the four houses, but by her characterisation of Gryffindor and Slytherin in particular, she has made that solution almost - if not entirely - unreachable. The schism is too well established and the distrust too deep. >The idea of an heir of any house now that the memory of Tom Riddle >has been exorcised from the Chamber of Secrets and his diary destroyed >is inimical to this vision of unity. Precisely - and please don't write off the Heir of Slytherin, he lives on and is ready to play his ancestry and his support in his own house to divide the houses even further - if nothing else then at least Slytherin vs. the rest as it has always been. Whether we will see other heirs of founders or not really is besides the point - there is a way in which Harry can be viewed as an heir of Gryffindor, but it is, to me, utterly indifferent whether he is ever called that in the books. What I would like is to see a believable way of healing the division of the four houses, but it would require not only a few good Slytherins, but also, IMO, some Gryffindor Death Eaters (or equivalent) - something to break up the stereotypical images we have so far seen of the two houses. >(I don't think it will happen, at least not till a lot of people have >been killed in VW2, but nevertheless it's the ideal JKR would like to >see achieved: I quite agree - I just think that she has set herself a very difficult task if she is going to persuade us that Slytherin, as a house, will be willing to join the fight against Voldemort. The way Slytherin has been presented so far, it seems to me far more likely that a few Slytherins might join the fight against the Dark Lord, but the house as such, the majority of the Slytherins, will swell the ranks of the Death Eaters. Likewise Gryffindor is, as it has been presented so far, the logical place to find recruits to the Order of the Phoenix. Of the members we know or strongly suspect the house of, at least 6 were in Gryffindor (or are strongly suspected thereof), only one was never at Hogwarts, and only one was in Slytherin. I have no idea about the rest. >Not just the houses but the various species of thinking beings from >House Elves to Centaurs united against evil. Somehow the idea of >Slytherin as the epitome of evil just doesn't fit this vision. But it fits the description of Slytherin in the books so far. Somehow a complete reformation of the magical community seems a bit unrealistic to me - social inertia ought to ensure that the attempt to bring acceptance of e.g. Centaurs, Merpeople and house-elves will fail, but fortunately this is fiction so Rowling may decide to take other roads, but it will, IMO, be difficult to do it in a believable way. It'll be interesting to see how she's going to pull it off ;-) Troels From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Thu Nov 13 01:21:10 2003 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 01:21:10 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84875 --- Kneasy wrote: > > I'm feeling a bit sour. > Not my usual sunny disposition, spreading > sweetness and light everywhere. > No song on my lips, no pat for the neighbour's > moggies. > Instead it's a snarl and a size nine. > > When I'm in this sort of mood, friends try and > distract me with a pint or two, but of course > that's not possible by internet. Pity. And what > has brought me to this pass? I'll tell you. > > Stereotyping. > > By the posters. If you want to decry political correctness, go ahead and do so. Don't get all embarrassed about your project and retreat into name-calling. It's not "stereotyping" when someone criticizes the portrayal of particular groups or individuals in a book. It's not "stereotyping" when someone analogizes the treatment of a particular group (house elves) in a work of fiction with a RW social phenomenon (slavery). Stereotyping means taking some perceived generality about a group and applying it either to the group as a whole or to an individual member of the group. If you are really trying to argue that any of the posters whom you are critiquing have been applying (or suffering from the inadvertent application of) stereotypes, you need to explain yourself better. > I start to get itchy when when posters start to > flat-out tell JKR that she is wrong in what she > writes and I become positively restive when, > as in a post made recently, there is a comment > to the effect that she's not quite as bad as was > thought, but she must do better. Even with a > *g* tacked onto the end of the paragraph this > reads as verging on the pretentious and > patronising. Again, if you need to resort to namecalling, at least get the names right! What you've described involves no pretense or patronizing whatsoever. You just don't like it when people criticize the stories based on criteria aimed at social engineering ("the story would be better if it taught this lesson," or "if it showed this sort of role model," or "if it inculcated this set of values"). To be honest, I don't particularly like those criticisms either. I agree with Steve (#84678) that a story -- like any other work -- should be valued for the factors that make it great, and cannot be expected to accomplish an infinite set of social agendas. On the other hand, I disagree with the suggestion in Steve's post, and to some extent yours, that it is ok for a bestselling author simply to ignore the fact that her book is being read by millions upon millions of children. That, to me, is like the famous athlete (and there have been many) who says "I am not a role model." Those athletes are (were) role models, like it or not. They can choose to be bad role models or good ones, but they cannot escape responsibility for their actions. I believe that Rowling is very conscious of the level of influence she wields. In some areas she has chosen not to preach; in others (personal responsibility, for instance) her books send a very clear message. > Posters, it seems, hate stereotyping - except > when it's their own. Some are determined not to > be happy unless JKR writes words that match their > personal prejudices. Not "prejudices"; preferences. When folks say, for instance, "I wish there were more strong female characters," they are not saying "JKR's characters do not fit my image of what women are like"; they are instead saying "there is a particular type of female character I would like to see portrayed." You can agree or disagree about their choice of words (i.e., what makes a "strong female character"). You can agree or disagree about whether the characters in the book really lack the characteristics others want to see portrayed more prominently. You can agree or disagree about whether Rowling made good choices in the characters she chose to portray. But you cannot really deny that Rowling made the choices she made, nor that those choices have an impact on the reader (and, in most cases, different impacts on different readers). > Admittedly, the HP books are written from an > English viewpoint and many of the readers may > not appreciate the nuances of social structure > and behaviour in this little island. Oooh, oooh, I think I can still hear the echo of the word "patronizing" (if you *will* pardon my Yankee spelling); I wonder why that might be.... > But strangely, other books don't get the same > treatment. When comparisons are made to other > fantasies, fictions or even what some may > consider philosophical or religious source books > the same standards don't seem to be applied. I think you lack perspective, here. Works of all types are criticized for their conformity or failure to conform to all sorts of social norms. The more widely circulated a work is, the broader the range of criticisms, and the HP books are nothing if not well-read. For a couple of examples involving similarly well-known fantasy works, try a websearch on "'Star Wars' & 'Jar Jar' & stereotype" or "'Lord of the Rings' & 'female characters'". > The fact that this is a fictional construct and > not to be taken seriously seems to have passed > them by. Uhhhhh...please excuse me while I get up off the floor and try to stop chortling. "Not to be taken seriously"? In post number 84678 on only the *most serious* of many Internet discussion groups devoted to these books? Were you not taking these fictional constructs seriously when you started a lengthy thread a few weeks ago speculating about relationships between Dobby, the Potters and the Malfoys? Perhaps what you mean is that Rowling's wizarding universe is not supposed to have any connection with or bearing upon the real world, but that claim is just as laughable, if not as obviously so. Responsibility for one's one choices -- no bearing upon the real world? Explicit moral messages about the need for bipartisan (and interracial) cooperation in the face of evil -- no connection with real life? > Elves seem to be a cause of regular angst with > frequent fulminations against the evils of slavery. > All well and good, but is it applicable? > > Slavery has never, ever been a significant part of > English society; at least not since the Romans left.... > Slavery is not part of our tradition. Why then assume > that JKR would add such a perversion to an essentially > English story? With all due respect to history, I do think that Rowling and her English readers have probably heard of the concept of slavery. And it's not some sort of ungrounded assumption when people draw the analogy between the situation of the house elves and that of slaves: Rowling drew the analogy herself, in text, through the mouth of her favorite character. Believe, if you prefer to, that the parallel is an accident, but be sure to keep your eyes and mouth closed against that sand. > It seems JKR decided to add characters from old > Scottish folklore - Brownies. Elves that colonise > houses, do the chores for no payment, but vanish when > offered gifts or clothes, never to return.... I am not familiar with the Scottish folktale Brownies. But the parallel (if any) between house elves and Brownies really has no bearing on the validity of the analogy between house elves and slaves. Rowling intentionally created a race of creatures who are regarded by the witches and wizards as inferior, who serve particular witches and wizards, without pay, who address those witches and wizards as "masters," who are not generally free to leave their places of servitude, and who are not permitted (by their customs or by their masters, pick whichever you will) to wear regular clothing. There simply could be no doubt that Rowling was aware of the parallel -- however imperfect -- to human slavery, even before she had Hermione explicitly give voice to it. > Even a superficial analysis of the text militates > against Elvish slavery. They are too strongly magical, > the majority seem happy in their role and the bee in > Hermione's bonnet is not supported by *anyone* in the > canon, not soft-hearted Hagrid, not compassionate > Dumbledore. Doesn't that tell you something? If all you are trying to say is that many or most of the house elves do not seek freedom, that does not contradict anything I recall anyone saying in any of the (many) discussions on this subject. One of the looming questions for the next two books concerns the implications of such "voluntary" slavery. From the example of Dobby, we know that there are at least *some* house elves who are unwillingly enslaved. "Too strongly magical" sounds as if you think the elves could walk out whenever they wanted. Dobby's example, again, refutes that claim. And even if the elves were bound to servitude only through social norms and not by the force of law or magic, I think the majority of readers would still view the arrangement as akin to slavery. Why does no one support Hermione? There is a whole list of possible alternatives to the reason that your rhetorical question seems to be aimed at: 1) She is annoying and not well-liked. 2) It's difficult and embarrassing to fight an entrenched social norm, and it appears unrewarding. This would be particularly true for many muggle-born students who are stepping into a new world they do not understand. 3) It is even more difficult to fight a social institution that has a strong economic incentive attached to it (free labor). 4) Students' own self-interest is involved because of the Hogwarts house elves and in the case of those whose families own house elves. 5) It's confusing that the house elves say they do not want freedom. It brings to bear countervailing moral issues, and calls the end result of the crusade into question. 6) In the case of Dumbledore, his abstinence may just be another example of leaving students to their own devices in order to fuel their self-determination. > Brownies (and I believe by extension Elves) belong > to the house not the householder. They stay, even if > the family moves. I will assume that you are correct here although there is conflicting canon. Your claim is consistent with the discussion concerning the Hogwarts elves and some other comments (I think by Ron) about how elves come with fancy old houses. It is arguably a bit inconsistent with Dumbledore's explanation of why Kreacher was able to go to Narcissa, where the loyalty seemed to be more to the "house" in a geneological sense. It is perhaps also a bit inconsistent with the focus of Dobby, Winky and Kreacher on keeping their *masters'* secrets. Either way, I don't see the fact that house elves are bought and sold with the property -- like a chandelier or a piece of cabinetry -- as distinguishing their situation from slaves. They still call the new owner "master." They still serve at his or her pleasure, and are dismissed at his or her pleasure. > They *refuse* pay. Winky and the Hogwarts house elves refuse pay. Dobby seeks pay. We don't know enough to generalize beyond that. Query whether pay is of any utility to a house elf who is well-fed and -housed and is not permitted to leave the premises in any event. As I said before, the fact that the house elves accept their situation -- whether because of inertia or tradition or fear that they would have no other place to go or sheer love of the work -- does not alter the other aspects that make it resemble slavery. > Slaves were never punished by giving them freedom. > If they had been, all slave societies would have > been hot-beds of slave criminality. Wrong, actually. In the American South, it was not unheard of to threaten a timid or weak slave with being cast out. It was not easy for a cast-out slave to find work or a place to live, particularly far away from a city. (Compare the reception Dobby got from other wizarding families to what such a slave might have received from other plantation owners.) > Lately sexual stereotyping has been centre stage. > Oh, dear. Am I mistaken or has freedom of choice > been banned by some posters? Molly in particular has > taken the brunt of the criticism. She is at fault > because she is not this, that or the other. Mothers > must not present a motherly image it seems, or at > least only do so in the gaps in their busy, > professional schedule. All women must conform to a > certain fashionable profile or be damned. As I've said on those other threads that you are lambasting, I don't agree with most of the criticisms of Molly as a parent, or of Rowling for making Molly a prominent character. But it's wrong to accuse those posters of "stereotyping" -- what many of them are *objecting* to is the (perceived) use of a particular stereotype in drawing Molly's character. (A stereotype, incidentally, that you recognize in identifying Molly as "a traditional English mum.") In your effort at sarcasm, you also mischaracterize most of the actual criticisms that were leveled at the presentation of Molly, which focused on such things as overprotectiveness and undue interference with her grown kids' personal choices. As I said, I generally disagree with those criticisms, but that does not prevent me from listening to them. > Molly is a well drawn portrait of a common British > phenomenon - the traditional mum. They can still be > found in large numbers, but some posters fume at the > thought of their very existence in this fictional > realm, let alone the factual world. Perhaps they feel > threatened by her; maybe they are not so secure in their > choices after all. Methinks they doth protest too much. > Some nagging doubts, are there? That kind of personal attack is simply uncalled for. It would be more productive to deal with the arguments, rather than resorting to name-calling and questioning others' integrity. It is just *possible* that someone might disagree with you for reasons other than his or her deep psychological flaws. It is particularly ironic that you fail to acknowledge a genuine disagreement and then close with that quote from Cromwell. -- Matt From oppen at mycns.net Thu Nov 13 01:27:19 2003 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 19:27:19 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Heir of other houses References: Message-ID: <00d301c3a985$48925540$e34b0043@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 84876 > Troels wrote: > > The conflict between Gryffindor and Slytherin seems to me to > > represent, to some extend, the conflict between good and evil > > in the magical world. > > The conflict between good and evil might be said to, in the > > magical world, be fought by proxy through the inter-house > > conflict. (snip snip snip) > > Surely this view is an oversimplification. For one thing, it leaves > out Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff, which would also be "good" in this view. > Look at Cedric Diggory, eulogized by Dumbledore and mourned by the > whole school--even the Slytherins. Look at Dolores Umbridge, who is > indisputably evil, but neither a Slytherin nor a Death Eater. As far as I can remember, we never find out _which_ House Dolores Umbridge was in during her time at Hogwarts. For that matter, if she hadn't mentioned being happy to be _back_ at Hogwarts, I'd have to say that we wouldn't know for sure if she even _was_ a Hogwarts Old Girl. She _could_ have been educated at Beauxbatons, Durmstrang, the Salem Witches' Institute, or one of the smaller schools in Europe. Look at > Dumbledore's words to Harry (I think they're DD's--correct me if I'm > wrong): "The world is not divided into good people and Death Eaters." > That being the case, the WW is not divided into good people and > Slytherins, either. Snape, the Slytherin, is not wholly evil; Sirius > and James, the (highly probable) Gryffindors, are not wholly good. This is an excellent point. Harry, being young and highly partisan, does tend to think of the Slytherins as all-evil, but I doubt that they all are...or, for that matter, that the DEs are all Slytherin Old Boys and Old Girls. The idea of an heir of any house now that the memory of Tom > Riddle has been exorcised from the Chamber of Secrets and his diary > destroyed is inimical to this vision of unity. This is also a very good point. From vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com Thu Nov 13 01:36:43 2003 From: vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com (vecseytj) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 01:36:43 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna Oh my! In-Reply-To: <014b01c3a8bf$700065c0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84877 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Taryn Kimel" wrote: > Kitten: > And even though I don't think the love life of our teenage > boy is going to be a great significance in the upcoming books. I > would like to see Harry walking into the sunset with "his" girl. (I > think he'll earn it) Which is why I decided to post. It seems to > me that the major "SHIPS" people seem to like are H/H, H/G, > and > H/L is it only me? Or does anyone else out there think that none of > these girls are right for Harry? > > > > Taryn: > There ARE some people, among which I count myself, who think that Harry shouldn't get together with ANYONE. It may just be my Irish blood and its thirst for tragedy, but I feel that Harry is destined, at the end of everything, to be alone in more than one way. He will face Voldemort alone. He's been set apart from others his whole life, even from his best friends. Even they understand that it's his destiny to stand as a lone hero. He's an epic hero, and epic heros rarely have time for romantic attachments. It usually clashes with their saving the world. ^_^;; > >I find Harry and Hermione so UTTERLY platonic. You could have POSSIBLY (a pretty small possibly, at that) convinced be before OotP, but the last book just sealed their brother-sister relationship in for me. > very large snip~ Hi Taryn and Kitten: I have been getting the feeling from a lot of posters that any ship for Harry is one ship too many. Harry is like the favorite brother who come home for Sunday dinner and bring along the girl of his dreams. Harry (I mean our brother)admires the lovely charming girl whom he loves dearly. We on the other hand see a hair lip and glasses, with a laugh like a frog. Who's right? Is it just that our brother (harry) is so wonderful that NO girl is good enough or is it that Harry is being blinded by a "love potion?" I don't know, but I did get that impression with Cho (in the OOP) that everyone just wanted to string her up from the highest tree. I~ think that Harry is going to ride off into the sunset with old Cho, but no one belives me. And do you what to know why I think this is going to happen? 'Cause I can't stand Cho. (and honestly and truely this is the only reason) And that is how it usally works out with your fav... sibling... they marry someone you can't imagin being part of your family. it's not that they are not nice or fun or that your sib doesn't love them... it's just that we wanted perfect, and Harry.. i mean our sibling just wants love. So am I on any ship? Hummm well, kind of, I'd like to (secretly of course and with a grin on my face 'cause ya all know I'm just joking) be on the I hope LV off's Cho ship, but that is kind of mean so... I guess, I'm really, well kind of, sort of, on the H/G ship. 'Cause, for some reason I really like Ginny. Maybe it is her red hair, or her open and devoted crush, showing her deepest feeling for Harry with an open heart (well as deep as a 11 year old can get but... anyway). Or maybe it is just Harry's kindness to her when she was in the throws of her deep crush. Like when Ginny put her elbow in the butter dish. Harry was glad that no one noticed. He didn't want anyone to make fun of her. Silly reason to base a relationship on I know, but, there it is. It is so presious, so gentle that; I just love it. Well anyway.. anyone else want to jump in.. am i wrong? I'm just wondering if anyone else see's the harry ship docking up the Cho's.. Tj From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 01:50:15 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 01:50:15 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84878 > Marina wrote: > Well, it's not like JKR never makes the same point twice. I'm > thinking of the old "death is sudden and arbitrary" deal. We've seen > it with both Cedric and Sirius, no? > > Maybe the point in finally revealing James, etal to be in Slytherin > (if indeed they are Slyths) is to show that not all Slytherins grow > up to be horrible, evil, DEs. Thus, Harry not only has to deal with > adjusting his images of James and Sirius (in OoP) as not being pure > as the driven snow. But, now that he's seen that, he gets hit in Book > 6 or 7 with the realization that they were in Slytherin, but opted > not to follow the route to Voldemort that many Slytherins chose. Who's to say all Voldemort's followers were Slytherins? Couldn't someone from another house also be recruited? Judging from him becoming an animagi and the fact that he survived fighting Voldemort three times, we know that James was a skilled and powerful wizard. If Voldemort was looking for powerful wizards to aid him, then he would have seen James as prime material. What difference would James house affiliation make? Either way, he would have turned Voldemort down for the same reasons. Some could argue that if he was a Slytherin, then many of his housemates became DEs and that he would have had more peer pressure to join Voldemort than if he'd been in Gryffindor, a house that definately turned out far less DEs, however there's one point in particular that needs to be brought out. James was a Marauder, a group composed of four close friends. As we've seen from the trio of Harry, Ron and Hermione, this small group is pretty tight. I'm not saying that his non-maurader, Slytherin friends decision wouldn't effect James own decision, I'm just saying don't assume too much. Anyone noble enough to save their enemy from a werewolf, could say no to peer pressure from housemates who were not his closest friends. Yolanda From nibleswik at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 01:50:39 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 01:50:39 -0000 Subject: Which HP characters are stereotypes?, was: Re: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84879 Carol: > In fact, the only two characters who seem to me to be >stereotyped are Crabbe and Goyle, who are virtually >indistinguishable except for their heights and haircuts, and I >confess that it would be hard to avoid stereotyping in their > case. I disagree. My major complaint about stereotyping among the HP characters is not Crabbe and Goyle, who would not be particularly more useful to the plot if three-dimensional, but Draco. He's so boring! With the end of OotP, we're finally starting to gain insights into what drives him, but not nearly as much as I'd like. He's a character I would love to see more developed, whether he ends up on the dark side, as would seem likely, or if he converts, as is my hope. For someone who serves such a major purpose in the books, he's terribly flat. I want to know what his childhood was like -- did his parents really coddle him, or does he say that to cover up painful memories? I can definitely see Lucius as an abusive father. He's abusive about everything else, after all. How much does he know about the DEs? Has he heard his father speaking to LV? Has he, perhaps, seen LV himself? (That would be a nice connection to Harry.) I think Draco's quite intelligent and interesting, but I've no way of knowing, as we aren't told much about him. Then again, ask me any HP question, and I'm likely to incorporate Draco into the answer. I don't know why, but he makes sense to me, and I'll be thrilled if he's more toward the forefront of the last two books. So, for the rest of you, who aren't all Draco-fans (and yes, I was long before the movies. I imagined him as unattractive and still thought he was marvelous.), which HP characters do you think are stereotypes and would you change that or not? For example, I really wish Draco were more developed, but don't care about Crabbe and Goyle. Which characters would you like to see more of in general? Cheekyweebisom From FldaGirl27 at aol.com Thu Nov 13 01:34:02 2003 From: FldaGirl27 at aol.com (FldaGirl27 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:34:02 EST Subject: Incursions into Privet Drive Message-ID: <1e3.1342c2fc.2ce4398a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84880 The question is not with what you wrote so much but as to the definition for 'home' concerning Harry "While you can still call home the place where your mother's blood dwells, there you cannot be touched or harmed by Voldemort?She {Petunia} knows allowing you houseroom may well have kept you alive for the past 15 years." (OOTP, US, chap. 37, p. 836). But hasn't Harry said time and time again that he considers Hogwarts home rather than the Dursleys.. I do not ever recall Harry saying "I'm going home for the summer" it is always "to the Dursleys" For some reason that quote makes me think that Harry somehow has a distant relative from his mother's side at Hogwarts.... just ignore that.. Just a thought... AJaKe [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From augustinapeach at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 02:18:55 2003 From: augustinapeach at yahoo.com (augustinapeach) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:18:55 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84881 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sharon" wrote: (snipped) I still can't figure out why kids at Hogwarts didn't flock to him when he first arrived. Yes, Draco made an effort & was rebuked, but I don't recall others. As far as looks go, there are plenty of music stars out there that are not that great looking (Kid Rock, Axl Rose, etc), but are worshipped none the less because of their star status. I thought is was a common human desire to "rub elbows with the stars". Why didn't the kids at Hogwarts want to do this with Harry when he first got there being as how he kind of had this star status in the WW? > Sharon Now AP: I think part of the reason is that Harry didn't encourage "star worship." Up until he entered Hogwarts, he had apparently been quite good at being "invisible" in school to avoid Dudley and friends. I would guess he has established some strong attitudes about superficial friendships because of his experiences in school ("Everybody knew that Dudley's gang hated that odd Harry Potter in his baggy old clothes and broken glasses, and nobody like to disagree with Dudley's gang" - SS, p. 30) I've always thought Harry has a strong sense of self-worth -- how he managed to develop it growing up with the Dursleys, I can't imagine -- so he doesn't have the need for affirmation and adoration from the crowd (as some rock stars seem to). From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Thu Nov 13 02:21:45 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:21:45 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna Oh my! Message-ID: <144.1c5230de.2ce444b9@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84882 Well, I knew eventually I would someday get in on this Shipping discussion. I have tried for almost a year now not to get involved in it because I just don't want to know, but since it is coming up constantly in posts now, I suppose I will add my two knuts. The H/T Ship: I just don't ever see this happening. Tonks will probably befriend Harry and be a sister-esque influence as she guides him on his way to his hopeful career path of auror. I just don't see Harry involving himself romantically with someone at least 6 years his senior. Nor do I really see Tonks as the kind of lass who would be interested in pursuing that kind of relationship with a mere child. If anything, she will help Harry and be there for him in the friendship capacity, but nothing else. Also, we haven't seen a great deal of interaction between the two, so I have never had the feeling that Harry was that close to her. I *do* think he might 'crush on her' at some point, but it will be fleeting. This crush may be for the fact that Harry has been forced to accept adult responsibility and the girls his own age do not understand him or that he has a duty to the WW. H/Hr.: Again, I don't see it. Hermione is one of Harry's best friends, and while as adults we may look at our friends, at times, as possible romantic interests, I don't really see Harry or Hermione doing this to one another. They have a special friendship and I doubt that either would jeopardise all that they have endured together. R/Hr: It would be a heated relationship and for this reason, I do not see it happening either. Ron would drive Hermione nutters and vice versa. Too many arguments. Maybe later in life. H/G: I think it has been established that Ginny's crush has fled her. She has her eyes on other boys at school, and Harry seems to like it that way. Harry probably will not stop seeing Ginny as Ron's little sister. The bonds of friendship between boys prevent this kind of relationship in many cases. Harry would have to consider Ron and Ginny in every step he would make in his relationship with her. So, again, I don't think it will ever happen. H/L: I enjoy reading the posts on this possible Ship, but I think Loony Luna Lovegood might be too much of a Loony Luna for Harry to handle. They *do* have many similar qualities, but I just don't see Harry with her. She is eccentric and mysterious, possibly a funny mix with Ron, but not with Harry. Harry, although I think he needs a bit of humour, would not be truly suited to her. H/Cho: Good lord, I really hope not. I would really hope that after all her fits of emotion- although some understandable- Harry would think better. I just don't like her after OoP. However, they do argue enough to mirror what we have seen of James and Lily's budding romance. But, really, I hope not! I am unimpressed with Cho. She seemed much more sensible in GoF than what she turned to be in OoP. Harry, too, has probably with his teenage angst and inexperience turned her off for good. ( Then a lot of girls go for that... so...) It's likely, however; I just don't want to see any more of her. H/?: Ahh Miss question mark. If Harry lives through his seventh year, I would hope that he find someone with whom he can have the kind of relationship we are led to believe his mum and dad had. I am still on the side of Harry the lone Ship. I think with all he has on his plate at the moment throwing a girl into the mix would be dreadful. And, as he feels at the end of OoP, the things that were important to him before Sirius's death are no longer that way. Harry has been forced to grow up far too quickly and to accept adult responsibility. He is to basically save the world. I can only see trouble if a girl were to interfere with his tasks at hand. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From smaragdina5 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 03:12:19 2003 From: smaragdina5 at yahoo.com (smaragdina5) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 03:12:19 -0000 Subject: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84883 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jennifer" wrote: > Carol: > Lily's parents were muggles, > Jennifer: > > Do we know that Lily's parents were muggles? >I believe that her Here's a very workable compromise: I just read a theory (on mugglenet.com editorial) that Lily and Petunia's parents were SQUIBS. That covers all the bases. I suppose we will find out! smaragdina5 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 02:17:17 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:17:17 -0000 Subject: DD's affection for Snape, was:(Re:Snape Theory right here...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84884 Arya wrote: > I think it was D-dore who taught Snape. Now, we can see from Harry- > Snape Occlumendcy lessons that if one is open to see, then an awful > lot of insight can be gained about a person while teaching them this > art. I tend now to think that D-dore's affection and trust of Snape > is directly related to the likelyhood that Dumbledore once soent > hours pointing his wand at Snape and crying, "Legilimens!", making > Snape gasp upon the floor as he shared his own agonizing childhood > and past life. Lauri wrote: > Interesting theory, Arya. I suppose I thought Snape learnt > occlumency the same place he learnt all the curses he knew before > coming to Hogwarts. (According to Sirius in the cave in GOF.) > > One question for you: do we have canon for DD feeling actual > *affection* for Snape? Have we seen him behave affectionately toward > him? Yes, in Every Book DD tells someone, "I trust Severus Snape." > But Dumbledore trusts people he should not trust, in every book. > (Erm... primarily DADA teachers.) > > Considering those two facts - that DD continually says he trusts > Snape, and that DD trusts too much - make me very suspicious of > Snape. (As JKR means me to be, no doubt, LOL.) Snape has continually proven himself worthy of trust. Not once has he been the villain of the book, no matter how little Harry trusts him. He tried to thwart Quirrell's hex and he sent the Order of the Phoenix to save Harry from the Death Eaters in the DoM, to name only two examples. And he distrusted all those DADA teachers when Dumbledore didn't, with good reason in most cases. Dumbledore, who has worked with Snape for fourteen years and knows him well, has some reason (other than what we've seen) for trusting Snape, which he is withholding from Harry and JKR is withholding from us. (Voldemort, OTOH, distrusts Snape and intends to kill him.) Dumbledore is certainly not perfect, but I'm certain that he's right in this. Carol From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 03:37:37 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 03:37:37 -0000 Subject: Why Ravenclaw? was, Re: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: <002201c3a966$b8852e00$2ef51d43@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84885 Iggy wrote: > First, she picked up on lessons in the DA quickly enough, and was one of the > few who apparently could create a corporeal Patronus. This indicates a reasonably strong mind. She also possibly works hard when we > can't see it. >Other than that, I hope that Cho shows us why she's in Ravenclaw within the > next two books, or I'd be inclined to chalk up a miss on the Sorting Hat's > part... What about all of those Gryffindors that haven't done anything brave yet? Did the Sorting Hat put them in the wrong house or have they simply not had the opportunity to show us how brave they are? No, we haven't seen Cho being really intelligent yet, but then again we haven't seen too much of Cho at all. She is a year (I believe) ahead of Harry and in Ravenclaw. Harry doesn't see much of her, which means we don't see much of her. Have we seen her in any situations where, she could have shined as a Ravenclaw? Here's a quick (and possibly incomplete) recap of Cho's appearances: POA - She's pretty and the Ravenclaw seeker. GoF - She's pretty and with Cedric Diggory. Also, she didn't wear a "Potter Stinks" button. OOP - DA club and a couple of dates. We really haven't seen her presented with any problems that would require her to show us how smart she is. For example, she hasn't had any moments like Hermoine has: - the potions riddle at the end of PS/SS - the whole is-Malfoy-the-Heir-of-Slytherin problem in CoS, which resulted in Hermione researching, finding, and then brewing the polyjuice potion. - the problem with communicating DA meeting dates and times problem. Ok. I admit she could have stepped up and said something on that last one, but in her defence remember how impressed the other Ravenclaws were with Hermione's solution. Cho may not be as smart and as quick to find a solution as Hermione is, but that doesn't mean she doesn't belong in Ravenclaw. We have not and may never see why she was sorted into Ravenclaw that doesn't mean she doesn't belong there. Yolanda From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 04:20:26 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 04:20:26 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84886 AP ("augustinapeach") wrote: > I think part of the reason is that Harry didn't encourage "star > worship." >He doesn't have > the need for affirmation and adoration from the crowd (as some rock > stars seem to). The above statement explains Harry's reaction to "star worship", but it doesn't answer the question why didn't more kids in the WW try to befriend the famous Harry Potter. Think about it. He is the "Boy who lived" who "mysteriously" defeated the greatest dark wizard of the time while only a baby. I wrote "mysteriously" for a reason. We know what really happened. At least, Dumbledore's explanation of it, but most of the WW does not. To them Harry's a mysterious and powerful wizard, or should I say wizard in training. I'd thought about this before. Here's my take on it. I've seen several interviews of up and coming young actors/actresses, who have gotten a chance to work with a big name, megabucks, movie star who in some cases they were a fan of and many of them have said the same thing. Once they met the "big star" and started talking to them, they immediately realized, "Oh, right he/she's a person just like me.". I think everyone that met Harry realized the same thing. In PS/SS, on the Hogwarts express, Ron and Harry have one of those "just like me" moments. PS/SS even says that Harry found Ron as fascinating as Ron found him. They took turns talking about themselves while consuming a huge amount of chocolate. It didnt take long for Ron to meet and get to know Harry, not "The Boy who lived", but Harry. Harry's huge fame would have caused most of the students at Hogwarts to hang back for a moment to see what he was going to be like. What they saw was a kid just like them who eats, goes to class, and walks around Hogwarts just like they do. If everyone, that met Harry saw the same thing Ron did, then I'm not surprised he's not being fawned over. It wouldn't/shouldn't take long to change people's perceptions from "Boy that lived" to "Harry Potter", once you've met him. Yolanda From helen at odegard.com Thu Nov 13 04:26:58 2003 From: helen at odegard.com (Helen R. Granberry) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:26:58 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna (and Tonks) Oh my! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <039c01c3a99e$615ce270$6401a8c0@helenw1> No: HPFGUIDX 84887 I think Hermione, Ginny and Luna are all possibilities. I'll let other people deal with the evidence there. I wouldn't be opposed to any of those ships, though I admit a soft spot for Harry/Hermione (though I would be equally happy with Ron/Hermione). What I would like to argue for is Harry/Tonks. Not as something I am in any way certain about, but as something that is a possibility. I think a lot of people dismiss it out of hand simply because of the age difference, but I think it has merit. I'll admit some bias, because it is a ship I sail (among a few others). First, the age difference... it's not that great. Tonks has been an Auror for one year. Auror training takes three years. My impression from the Career Advice chapter was that one is accepted into Auror training straight out of Hogwarts. This would make Tonks 21-22, or 6-7 years older than Harry. While that seems a stretch for their present ages, Harry isn't a typical sixteen year old. He's faced Voldemort head on four times, which is something not even the best of the Aurors had done and lived to tell the tale. He has pretty much had to parent himself, given the neglect from the Dursleys, and he's come out quite well and mature beyond his years. As we've seen with Cho, the typical girls his own age are simply not suited. Harry is light years ahead of the typical sixteen year old in terms of maturity. A by product of his life experiences -- he's an old soul. Tonks, while not childish or immature, has a very benevolent, 'young' personality. JKR goes out of her way two or three times to point out how YOUNG Tonks is. Harry describes her as very young looking at least twice, and at one point describes her as looking like Ginny's older sister (putting her in the same generation as Harry and Co.). While she is an adult, an Auror and in the Order, it was Tonks who enabled the kids to spy on the Order by telling Ginny how to tell if the door had a special charm on it (forget what kind -- can't find my book). The two girls (Hermione and Ginny) really take to Tonks, as evidenced at the dinner the first night at Grimmauld Place and in the two scenes where the kids are dropped off at school (Harry notices they spend time hugging and saying their goodbyes). Older sister? Yes, maybe. But definitely same generation. I think Tonks is somewhere between the kid and adult world. She's an Auror and in the Order, but she's the youngest and by her actions, I think perhaps identifies with the kids. Similarly, Harry is between the kid and adult world by virtue of this role that has been thrust upon him. Long story short... I don't think the age difference really matters all that much. What evidence do we have that there is anything remotely romantic going on? Not much, though I think there is some proto-tension there. What really struck me about Tonks from the beginning, was unlike most of the other adults, she really reaches out to him (yeah, I was sailing this ship from Chapter 3). She offers to help him pack. She tries to make him feel at ease (complimenting him on his room and joking about her own shortcomings). She instantly recognizes that he doesn't like people looking at his scar. The morning of Harry's trial, she's happy to see him and offers him a chair (she does, of course, knock it over). When Harry is down about not making Prefect, she is the first one to approach him with reassurance and tell him she didn't make Prefect either. On the way to St. Mungo's, she sits beside him and tries to engage him in conversation about what happened. She's the only person aside from the usual suspects (the Weasleys, Hermione Sirius/Remus, Hagrid) to get Harry a Christmas gift -- a miniature Firebolt (she was admiring Harry's Firebolt the first time they met). Not only does she reach out to Harry, she pays attention! In almost every scene we see her in, she is reaching out to Harry in some way. While I don't think she has Bad Place feelings for Harry in OotP, I do think she genuinely likes him. For Harry's part, well... he's a bit preoccupied, but I get the impression that he thinks she is pretty cool. She's an Auror (like he wants to be). She's a Metamorphmagus (there is canon evidence he might be the same). She has pink hair and listens to cool music. She's exactly the sort of older girl teen boys crush on. He makes a point of describing her appearance pretty much every time we see her. While he doesn't say she is pretty (like with Cho), he describes her as having a heart shaped face and dark, sparkling eyes (pretty features). We know that Tonks will be checking up on Harry during the summer (along with Lupin and Moody). There is opportunity for him to get to know her better. They have some commonalities (the career thing, possibly the Metamorphmagus thing, the half-blood thing, Sirius). There was some quasi-innuendo when they first met (she liked his broom stick, 'Wand still in your jeans?'). I think there may be something there. Now... there was one thing I discovered the other day while surfing the Perseus Project (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/)which I found very interesting. The name Nymphadora has been analyzed to death since OotP came out. However, I did find something I think is new/interesting. While we know what 'nymphs' are in Greek mythology, the word in ancient Greek actually means BRIDE. Nymphadora = gift of the bride = love = this great big theme we know will be running through the rest of the series = the thing Voldie knows not. I realize the ship isn't a popular one. I realize it may be a long shot when compared to the H/Hr, H/G and H/L ships. However, I *do* think it is a possibility and... quite frankly, I love it. Tonks is someone who is young, yet with a great deal of responsibility as an Auror and a member of the Order. Harry is also a young person with a great deal of responsibility, but while Harry is full of angst, Tonks is someone who is upbeat. She's no nonsense, not afraid to speak her mind (sassing Moody) -- definitely not a hosepipe like Cho. I think she has ability to handle Harry and his darker moods. I think if this ship does happen, it will happen very near the end (although I would wager that for any Harry ship). I do think it is a possibility that Harry will end up alone or dead, but I think he deserves some happiness, no matter which girl 'wins'. Helen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 02:48:29 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:48:29 -0000 Subject: Lexicon Contmaination-James was in Gryffindor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84888 Marianne wrote: > Maybe the point in finally revealing James, etal to be in Slytherin > (if indeed they are Slyths) is to show that not all Slytherins grow > up to be horrible, evil, DEs. Thus, Harry not only has to deal with > adjusting his images of James and Sirius (in OoP) as not being pure > as the driven snow. But, now that he's seen that, he gets hit in Book > 6 or 7 with the realization that they were in Slytherin, but opted > not to follow the route to Voldemort that many Slytherins chose. > > She's already made the point that Slytherins can be good (in their own peculiar way) through Snape. James and Sirius likewise show that Gryffindors can be imperfect ("arrogant little berks" says it perfectly, IMO). Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 12 21:39:19 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:39:19 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84889 > The Sergeant Majorette says > > Because, as he modestly and adorably points out in SS, he's "...just > Harry". He didn't actually *do* anything to defeat Voldemort before > he arrived at Hogwarts; he simply "lived". In the first four books, > he's a scrawny little four-eyed geek who keeps getting slapped upside > the head by life. Then he adolesces, and it's not pretty. > > The WW has been ripped off. They signed up for a bold, stalwart St. > George of a Gryffindor. Instead they get this ratty looking kid in > welfare glasses, Forrest Gump with a wand. > Geoff: Look, as a scrawny little (sometimes four-eyed... reading glasses!) geek, I intend to form a society for the advancement and support of four eyed geeks. The world runs on us rather than on the brawn and sex appeal of characters like Brad Pitt or Jude Law or (sorry Laura) Orli. Your ratty kid has done more for the WW in fifteen years than George Bush for the RW in four. Consider your wrists smacked. :-)) From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Thu Nov 13 04:49:50 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 04:49:50 -0000 Subject: The Ultimate Theory Behind Occlumency and Legilimency In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20031113123134.00ac4bd0@pop3.xtra.co.nz> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84890 Subject Was: Another Snape Theory ...Harry/Snape... Arya wrote earlier: I've kind of been fostering the theory that since Dumbledore is an Occlumens and Snape is an Occlumens and someone had to teach Snape how to do this....(hmm, someone say perhaps who may want to help Snape be capable of lying in Volde's presence in order to spy?)...and I think it was D-dore who taught Snape. Now, we can see from Harry- Snape Occlumendcy lessons that if one is open to see, then an awful lot of insight can be gained about a person while teaching them this art. I tend now to think that D-dore's affection and trust of Snape is directly related to the likelyhood that Dumbledore once soent hours pointing his wand at Snape and crying, "Legilimens!", making Snape gasp upon the floor as he shared his own agonizing childhood Tanya wrote: While I have not figured out the connection in all of this. I can see how = that theory would work. For the life of me, I have trouble accepting that = LV would want his DE's to be able to block him out, how would he know who among them was trustworthy? > Then again, it might have been used to block out the enemy, but then, it would be a problem for LV still. > If Snape learnt Occlumency just prior to spying, then LV's entries into his= head before that would show little change afterwards as Snape could then block him. It would have to be done so there was no suspicion. Not only would Snape be able to verbally lie, but his demeanor and such would have to be a perfect poker face, no tremors etc. From what I have read, LV is good at smelling guilt. I assume he can do the same with fear. Arya again--it's along post: My theory is that a master of Occlumency can not just block the probe, but = actually manipulate it, project forth it's own images and thus lie using th= eir skills. It's easy to lie with words--you just say it, we've all done that = at some point. But often, there are people who are just plain poor liars--somethin= g, somehow, there's something in their face and expression or eyes....(they sa= y people won't or can't lie effectively while looking another in the eye)...something just makes whomever it is being lied to, know. They know = that they are not getting the truth and not only that, but sometimes, they = even know what it is that the real answer is. C'mon, this has had happened to everyone at least some time in their life!! I kind of see it like this. Sure there is a Spell "Legilimens" to do this forthright and openly, but wh= at's the point in that?!? We see Dumbledore "reads minds" and has his all knowing reputation and he isn't walking about, offering lemon drops and the= y pointing a wand and shouting, "Legilimens!" at everyone to be this all know= ing and twinkly fellow, is he? No, I say, as Snape suggests when he says, "Time and space matter in magic, Potter. Eye contact is often essential to Legilimency." (UK Adult E= d. p469) that means Legilimency is most likely an art that is much much more than some spell. It's the art of reading the emtions and questing through = another's mind when in close proximity and making eye contact. (Or just sharing a scar connection and a strange coicidence of having the same blood= due to some weird rebirthing potion that made Dumbledore gleam with triumph...) Let's take a look at all the scenes we scene glimpsed through Legilimency (= All references UK Adult Edition): --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. (p472) a. Harry jealously watching Dudley. b. Ripper chases Harry up tree as Dursleys laugh. c. Sorting Hat saying he?d do well in Slytherin. d. Hermione as polyjuiced (illegally brewed with Snape?s stolen ingredients) cat. e. Dementors closing in on (towards) him by the lake. f. Cho closing in under the mistletoe. 2. (p473) a. Great black dragon was rearing in front of him (1st task of tournam= ent?) b. Harry sees his mum and dad waving at him from the Mirror of Erised.= c. Cedric lying dead on the ground, eyes staring at him. After this one, Snape even says, ?You are allowing me to access memories you fear, handing me weapons!? and also says, ??fools ?who wallow in sad memories?? 3. (p474) a. Uncle Vernon nailing the letterbox shut. b. Dementors drifting across the lake towards him. c. Running down MoM hallway with Mr. Weasley (to his trial) and they pass the black door that leads to the DoM. This connection and realization as to what the door of his dreams is, then = prompt Harry to have the mental strength to repel the probe without and wand. 4. (p520) a. ?He had just been forced, yet again, to relive a stream of very ear= ly memories he had not even realised he still had, most of them concerning * humiliations* Dudley and his gang had inflicted upon him in primary school.= Snape asks about what was the last memory and Harry asks, ?You mean the one where my cousin tried to make me stand in a toilet?? but Snape says no = and meant, ?the one with the man (Rookwood) kneeling in the middle of a darkened room??. Which, of course, is form Volde. 5. (p521) (and after Harry was ?convinced he had gone too far? in saying something to piss Snape off) a. Dementors swoop across lake towards Harry. b. He screwed up his face in concentration. (to fight and repel Dement= ors, I assume) c. Dementors were coming closer?he could see the holes beneath their hoods. d. He sees ?Snape standing before him, eyes fixed on Harry?s face, muttering under his breath?? e. Snape grows clearer and Dementors fade away f. Harry casts Protego, thus reflecting the spell upon Snape where we = then see: i. Hook-nosed man shouts at cowering woman while small dark-har= ied boy cowers in corner. ii. Greasy-haired teen sits alone in dark bedroom, pointing wan= d at flies on ceiling and shoots them down. iii. Girl laughs at scrawny boy trying to mount broomstick. 6. (p522) a. Harry is hurtling down MoM corridor towards DoM and suddenly the door flies open and he?s in the circular room. (And now we?ve crossed a li= ne when it was no longer just a memory, but something completely new. And Snape is even ??angrier than when he?d looked into [his] memories??. ------------------------------------------------- Ok, now we only five separate casts of the Legilimens spell, but I propse t= hat each time that spell is cast, it is for a specific *emotion*. Let's look a= nd see what we can deduce they are: #1 we have to guess at and I might suggest (as it is Snape's first opportun= ity to break into his mind and Snape is Snape) it's *Things Harry wouldn't want= Snape to see/know*. #2 is given to us by Snape when he mentions Harry was "...allowing me to access *Memories You Fear*..." or maybe he meant it as *feelings* he fears = to remember, because I can't imagine Harry likes to admit he felt scare in = the 1st task, sad and alone when he saw his parents nor guilty as Cedrics death= ahunts him. #3 is a foggy one to me. I was thinkiong it might be when Harry felt hopel= ss or something. #4 is clear bcause Harry even summarizes them all as *Memories of Humiliation*. And remember, this is the one where suddenly, what seems to = be one of VOldemort's memories (Rookwood) pops up and guess what, even that memory of Volde could be seen as *humiliating* for the Dark Lord because he was given false information that made him waste time on fruitles= s efforts. #5 I think is *Memories Where He Felt Fear* because it's the Dementors as they almost kiss him and then Snape's face--and that is scary--especially a= s Harry had just felt he had pushed old Sev too far. But his seeing Snape in= his mind and then knowing Snape was in the room allowed Harry to reconnect his conscious to his own will and then enable him to see Snape muttering (The spell? The, perhaps, imperius-voice like directive for the spell to p= robe for specific memories??). Harry then casts a shield charm and reflects the= probe into Snape. And the same, *Memories Where He Felt Fear* can be said for what we see of Sev's mind. Fearing for the woman--his mum?-- being yelled at? Certainly he was "cowering". Shooting down flies? Hmm, = well, he's a student and shouldn't be doing magic....he should fear Malfada= Hopkirk...but then, oh, what spell does he use to do this? Could it be an = unforgiveable? Snape can be as reckless and self-endangering as a Gryffindor at times and my guess was he's AK'ing flies with illegal summertime magic, just hoping to get into trouble--or get attention or something. Maybe he hopes he'll get expelled and never have to go back to = school where those bullies are... And the last scene of trying to mount th= e bucking broomstick--yeah, that'd scare me too. #6 is also very foggy because it only gets so far before it totally turns i= nto something completely new. Maybe we are back to *Things Harry Doesn't Want Snape to Know About*. It certainly pisses him off an awful lot. ---------------- Ok, so, in conclusion, I propose that the Legilimencing Spell probes for a = specific emtion of feeling. Really what good would memories do unless you = could file them as meaning something to the person to whom they belong? This also would allow for Legilimency, The Art, to be used in everyday conversation. How about in CoS (Uk Adult Ed Soft p156) when Dumbledore asks Harry, "I must ask you, Harry, whether there is anything you'd like to tell me. Anyt= hing at all." while considering Harry carefully. Harry, of course, doesn't say = anything but he does flit through all sorts of images in his mind of the th= ings going on in regards to the Heir of Sly. Or maybe in GoF (UK Adult Ed Soft = p448) where Snape accuses Harry of stealing from his private office and Harry looks up as Snape's "fathomless black eyes [were] boring into Harry's= " as Snape speaks and insinuates he knows who stole and "Do not lie to me" and then lists the ingredients that were stolen. Harry stares back, determ= ined not to blink and is able to lie and say "I don't know what you're talking a= bout!" but then again, Snape was under the imrepssion and accusing Harry of being = the one who stole--which he did not. Both incidences seem to me to be examples of real life uses of Lgilimencing= skill. Oh, and let's not forget Volde's 1st appearance when he asks Quirre= l to let him face the boy. (UK Adult Soft p212) Harry seems scared stiff as the = "glaring red eyes" paralyse him from taking a step even back. And Volde speaking and telling about what he wants with the Elixer of Life and then conludes with "Now why don't you give me that Stone in your pocket?" It seems Volde got Harry to think about the Stone and that made Harry think of= where the stone currently was and that, through Legilimency, let Volde know= exactly where the stone was. So, there's my evidence, What do I think this means for how Occlumency os = used? Ok, I say that master Occlumens can first detect any sort of mind probe, deduce through where it tries to probe ("master your mind!") and the= n choose the lie or false infor or manipulating "image" or thoughts/memories = to be projected forth, without the one doing the probing, ever knowing. Yes, is, and I am sure he is, Volde is a mster of Legilimency, then it woul= dn't do well for a servant to simply block him out. Volde knows enough to not b= e able to trust his servants--he verifies evewrything with his skills. But S= nape, capable now of preventing his mind from being probed and capable of feeding forth false and censored info, is a master at duplicity (lying) and= a priceless spy for the Light. Unfortunately, this also means that Dumbledor= e can not read Snape this way--not at least since Snape has become a master Occlumens. Which also leads back into my theory that Snape learned from Dumbledore as Dumbledore gave him the skill to become at spy and lie to Volde. Dumbledore would have been the last person to not only read Snape this way, but, as we see in Harry's training, Dumbledore would have been able to probe for all sorts of emtions, feelings and memories (I'm sure the= y weren't all as bad as the ones Snape chose to use on Harry) that make Dumbledore very confident when he says, "I trust Severus Snape." Arya (My logest post like ever) From kkearney at students.miami.edu Thu Nov 13 04:54:50 2003 From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 04:54:50 -0000 Subject: Avada Kedavra Meaning In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031112192945.00b91a10@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84891 Lexicon Steve wrote: > >Check out the Spell Encyclopedia of the Lexicon. It includes the > >derivations and etymologies of every spell, including Avada Kedavra > >(which is Aramaic, by the way). Troels asked: > Do you know the meaning of the individual words of the killing > curse? And/or the transliteration from Aramaic? > > I've searched a few sites in an attempt to learn which part > expresses the wish and which part expresses the destruction, > but I haven't been able to find anything conclusive. I too am interested in the exact etymology of this phrase. For those who haven't visited, the Lexicon cites the origin as the aramaic phrase "adhadda kedhabhra" and translated this as "let the thing be destroyed". My internet research only revealed that I need to take some time to study the aramaic alphabet before I could have a good chance of disecting the words. When searching an Aramaic-English dictionary for "to destroy", I found a word that could possibly be somewhat related to kedhabhra (it had a kap, dalath, and beith, I think), but that was as close as I got. I found several Harry Potter sites containing the same explanation as the one found on the Lexicon. Some paraphrased but most were verbatim, including the abracadabra explanations. :) So, Lexicon Steve, from where did this explanation come? -Corinth From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 04:55:47 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 04:55:47 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84892 Yolanda wrote: > > Harry's huge fame would have caused most > of the students at Hogwarts to hang back > for a moment to see what he was going to > be like. What they saw was a kid just > like them who eats, goes to class, and > walks around Hogwarts just like they do. > > If everyone, that met Harry saw the same > thing Ron did, then I'm not surprised he's > not being fawned over. It wouldn't/shouldn't > take long to change people's perceptions > from "Boy that lived" to "Harry Potter", > once you've met him. Add to that his experience in his first potions class, where Snape reveals that "our new--*celebrity*" doesn't know a bezoar from an infusion of wormwood (SS 136-37, American edition). The Gryffindor and Slytherin first-years would have quickly seen that the great Harry Potter knew as little as they did, or even less, in this crucial subject. I imagine that the Slytherins, especially Draco, rather gleefully spread this news and that it helped to dampen the "Boy Who Lived" mystique rather quickly. (Quite possibly this was a deliberate move on Snape's part, and for the best as far as Harry was concerned, but I guess that's beside the point.) Carol From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Thu Nov 13 05:09:58 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 05:09:58 -0000 Subject: DD's affection for Snape, was:(Re:Snape Theory right here...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84893 > Arya wrote: > > I think it was D-dore who taught Snape. Now, we can see from Harry- > > Snape Occlumendcy lessons that if one is open to see, then an awful > > lot of insight can be gained about a person while teaching them this > > art. I tend now to think that D-dore's affection and trust of Snape > > is directly related to the likelyhood that Dumbledore once soent > > hours pointing his wand at Snape and crying, "Legilimens!", making > > Snape gasp upon the floor as he shared his own agonizing childhood > > and past life. > > Lauri wrote: > > Interesting theory, Arya. I suppose I thought Snape learnt > > occlumency the same place he learnt all the curses he knew before > > coming to Hogwarts. (According to Sirius in the cave in GOF.) > > > > One question for you: do we have canon for DD feeling actual > > *affection* for Snape? Have we seen him behave affectionately toward > > him? Yes, in Every Book DD tells someone, "I trust Severus Snape." > > But Dumbledore trusts people he should not trust, in every book. > > (Erm... primarily DADA teachers.) > > > > Well, he puts up with the snarky bastard--and that, for Snape, is A LOT!!! :-) It's not a Snapledore thing at all, just a father-figure type vibe I get from it. Perhaps I should have said...."indulgence" and not "affection". D-dore does allow Snape to get away with an awful lot (I would say) but we never really see him get too mad, he just smiles and twinkles and says, "Come, Severus, there's a delicious looking custard tart I want to sample." (Uk Ad Ed soft p64). Arya From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 02:38:09 2003 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:38:09 -0000 Subject: Avada Kedavra Meaning In-Reply-To: <20031112111441.41274.qmail@web40015.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84894 Hermowninny wrote: > I know there's someone in the groups that can enlighten me as to the > meaning of Avada Kedavra. Also, I'd really like to know where on the > net I can look up latin meanings. > > Paula now: > This term has also intrigued me from the very beginning. My personal theory is that the origin is from Hebrew. If we go with the first option, the root would be from the verb, "to lose". But, this verb can also have the meaning "to destroy OK, so on to the second word, a bit more simple, but not much. In Hebrew, it's actually two words. "Ke" is "as" or "like" (In Hebrew this > word is considered a prefix and attached to the word.) In the Bible, the word "dever" (divra) is the word used for the plague or pestilence that was brought on the Egyptians when they didn't let the Israelites leave. However, this same root, "DVR" can also be translated as "words, things, matters". (A basic problem here is that in Hebrew there are no vowels and they really aren't needed, but that's another story...However, when Hebrew words are written in Latin letters, it can be misleading.) So, if my math is right, we have four possible translations of the phrase, "Avada Kedvara", and in the context of the HP series, I'd go with something like "Gotten Rid of like a Plague". Hope this hasn't been too confusing. Now Neri: Paula, I believe "avada kedavra" is in fact in aramaic, which is indeed very similar to hebrew. In ancient times aramaic became sort of an international language of learned people (a bit like latin later) so it is no wonder it was ascribed to wizards. The traditional magic words "Abra kadabra" are actually aramaic-like gibberish (as "hocus pocus" is latin-like gibberish). Regarding the meaning of avada kedavra, I think you are right about the first word, but for the second word I'd go with "davra" (aramaic) or davar (hebrew) meaning "saying" or in the more archaic meaning "command". In the bible especially the combination "kedvar" (aramaic: "kedavra") is very common in the meaning of "as [someone's] command". For example, whenever some king is properly religious it is written that he did "kedvar adonai" (= as god commanded). According to this interpretation, "avada kedavra" means "die at [my] command". Neri, who apologizes that his english is not as good as his hebrew From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Thu Nov 13 06:55:09 2003 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 06:55:09 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84895 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" wrote: > When folks say, for instance, "I wish > there were more strong female characters," they are not saying "JKR's > characters do not fit my image of what women are like"; they are > instead saying "there is a particular type of female character I would > like to see portrayed." You can agree or disagree about their choice > of words (i.e., what makes a "strong female character"). You can > agree or disagree about whether the characters in the book really lack > the characteristics others want to see portrayed more prominently. > > -- Matt Alshain: I believe the OP stated that she used "strong female characters" to mean "three-dimensionally written, well-rounded female characters". Nothing to do with if the characters have characteristics that we happen to admire in real life. The argument that has been stated is that up to OOP, more female characters have stayed two-dimensional and under-developed. Molly was The Traditional English Mum, but we didn't get inside her character until we saw her fears. McGonagall is The Strict Schoolmistress, Lily The Virgin Mother, Cho The Love Interest, Lavender and Parvati The Giggly Ones. Yes, there are male archetypes in the stories as well. Yes, some of them never develops. Yes, Draco seems to be frozen in his role as nemesis. That's the point. Male character with zero development = boring male character. Female character with zero development = boring female character. More female characters with zero development = more boring female characters. I'm choosing to believe that JKR does this deliberately, and that as Harry starts realising that girls aren't just long-haired cootie bearers but persons in their own right, the female characters will start to develop. Alshain From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 02:39:39 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:39:39 -0000 Subject: DD's affection for Snape, was:(Re:Snape Theory right here... In-Reply-To: <126.343f3eff.2ce40f7f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84896 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > > > ? Arya wrote: > I think it was D-dore who taught > ? Snape. Now, we can see from Harry- > Snape > ? Occlumendcy lessons that if one is open to see, then > ? an awful > lot of insight can be gained about a > ? person while teaching them this > art. > > then Lauri: > Interesting theory, Arya. I > ? suppose I thought Snape learnt occlumency the same > ? place he learnt all the curses he knew before coming > ? to Hogwarts. (According to Sirius in the cave in GOF.) > ? One question for you: do we have canon for DD feeling > ? actual *affection* for Snape? Have we seen him > ? behave affectionately toward him? Yes, in Every Book > ? DD tells someone, "I trust Severus Snape." But > ? Dumbledore trusts people he should not trust, in every > ? book. (Erm... primarily DADA teachers.) > ? Considering those two facts - that DD continually says > ? he trusts Snape, and that DD trusts too much - make > ? me very suspicious of Snape. (As JKR means me to > ? be, no doubt, LOL.) Lauri > > > > Now me ( Tonks ) : > > > I had the feeling that Legilemency was a natural gift, thus those who > possessed it would have to have some ability with Occlumency. Occlumency being the > ability to block Legilimency would be something that others could learn, but > since Snape and Dumbledore are Legilemens, I always assumed that they had come by > their gifts naturally and never thought of the possibility of DD teaching > Snape. Since DD was headmaster during Snape's time, ( I think this has been > establishes both here and in canon- don't shoot me if I am wrong, not working on a > lot of sleep here) would he really have taught Snape? It doesn't fit for me. I > yield to agree with Lauri that Snape learned his abilities before coming to > Hogwarts. > > -Tonks As a child of eleven or younger? I'm sure that living with his cruel father was incentive to learn occlumency, but I doubt that he could have taught himself such a difficult skill at such an early age. Also, Harry has to be taught, whether or not he has a natural aptitude. (He's being manipulated by LV and he's resisting Snape, so it's hard to tell.) I would guess that it was Dumbledore who taught Snape, knowing his natural gifts and the danger he would encounter in spying on LV and the Death Eaters. There's really no way to know, but it makes sense that one of the reasons Dumbledore trusts Snape is that he's seen his thoughts and knows exactly what made Snape join the Death Eaters, what he did while he was a member, and what made him leave. He isn't trusting Snape based on some dim hunch. He knows him inside and out. And what was that about learning curses in the cave? How could that be if he learned them before he went to school? I think he learned the curses from his father (or by reading about them behind his father's back to protect himself). In any case, his father has all the marks of a dark wizard, but he's never identified as a Death Eater (they were mostly a generation younger). I'd be very interested in knowing more about him and his relationship with his son, who must have found Hogwarts a refuge just as Harry did in his first few years. (Yes, I know I'm speculating here.) Carol From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Thu Nov 13 07:02:00 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:02:00 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Which HP characters are stereotypes?, was: Re: Stereotyping Message-ID: <1dd.144c75e1.2ce48668@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84897 cheeky said: ? So, for the rest of you, who aren't all Draco-fans (and ? yes, I was long before the movies. I imagined him as ? unattractive and still thought he was marvelous.), ? which HP characters do you think are stereotypes and ? would you change that or not? For example, I really ? wish Draco were more developed, but don't care about ? Crabbe and Goyle. Which characters would you like to ? see more of in general? Cheekyweebisom Now Me ( Tonks): Wow. I would love to see a slew of characters be more developed. I realise that our main focus is Harry; however, I would love to delve more into the past of our special friend Severus. We have seen just a twitch of time that has made him who he is. I want to see the childhood and experiences that led our dear, sexy Severus to be a DE and what circumstances led to him switching sides. I want to know why he feels it a right to play favouritism in his classroom and why he can be such a right ol' sexy git. ( Long time fan of Snape despite his greasy hair). I would love to see more of Lupin to understand ( to make reference to a post I made yesterday? or the day before) if his gentle and kind nature is borne out of being a werewolf or if this was his child disposition. Flitwick, our jolly fun professor, I would like to delve more into him as a character. Basically, I would like to see more of what happened B.H. ( before Harry). We know it was dark times, but for me, at least, I would like to understand more about what nurtured our adult characters and exactly the wrath of Mouldy Voldy. - Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Thu Nov 13 07:08:06 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:08:06 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] DD's affection for Snape, was:(Re:Snape Theory right here... Message-ID: <15a.27671ebd.2ce487d6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84898 Carol wrote: ? And what was that about learning curses in the cave? ? How could that be if he learned them before he went to ? school? I think he learned the curses from his father (or ? by reading about them behind his father's back to ? protect himself). In any case, his father has all the ? marks of a dark wizard, but he's never identified as a ? Death Eater (they were mostly a generation younger). ? I'd be very interested in knowing more about him and ? his relationship with his son, who must have found ? Hogwarts a refuge just as Harry did in his first few ? years. (Yes, I know I'm speculating here.) I agree with you. When I first joined the list a long time ago as Snuffles, I wrote a rather extensive theory on Snape, Pre-OoP. Many of my ideas on Snape's childhood were confirmed in OoP, but I certainly think there was more to the story. However, I have a new theory... What if Snape's parents were not at all dark wizards? What if they were muggle loving, Weasley-esque people who just happened to be abusers unlike our red haired friendly, family? What if Snape branched out thinking that the only people who loved Muggles and held true values in the WW were just horrible people in the home? Snape would have lashed out. He would have learned all he could to be anything but his parents.... Rebellion is powerful for children. ( Not that I have faith in this theory....) I will see if I can find my original post on Snape and send you the #. So you can have a read. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 07:22:23 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 07:22:23 -0000 Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84899 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nibleswik" wrote: > > ...edited... > > Me (Cheekyweebisom): > > ...edtied... > > Now, as to what the hat says in CoS, that's fine. "You would have > done well in Slytherin" is not mutually exclusive with "you're a > Gryffindor"; in fact, that quote perfectly illustrates my next > point -- that the houses overlap. I do not believe there is the > harsh division between them that the students like to think there > is. This is yet another part of JKR's world that can be applied to > the RW. > bboy_mn: On a related note; I think it's time to go back to the exact details of what happened during the sorting ceremony. -HP and the Sorcerer's Stone; Am PB Pg 130- Next second he was looking at the black inside of the hat. He waited. "Hmmmm," said a small voice in his ear. "Difficult. Very Difficult. Plenty of Courage, I see. Not a bad mind either. There's talent, oh my goodness, yes -- a nice thrist to prove yourself, now that's interesting. ...So where shall I put you?" Harry gripped the edges of the stool and thought, 'Not Slyterin, not Slytherin'. - end this part - Notice that it is HARRY who brings up Slytherin, not the Sorting Hat. As you will see as the quote continues, the Sorting Hat merely interogates him as to 'why not Slytherin'. My observations on the Sorting Hat's observation. The very first thing that catches the 'eye' of the Sorting Hat is 'plenty of courage'. I take that to mean that the Hat sees Gryffindor characteristics in Harry first. Then 'not a bad mind', a reference to possible Ravenclaw placement. Next, 'a nice thirst to prove yourself' which I take to reflect ambition amoung other things and relates to possible Slytherin placement. - Book Quote Continues - "Not Slyetherin, eh?" said the small voice. "Are you sure? You could be great, you know, it's all here in our head, and Slytherin will help you on the way to greatness, no doubt about that -- no? ... - end this part - In a sense, the Hat is saying, 'why not Slytherin?'. It will help you fulfill your greatness, and help you prove to the world that you are a great and powerful wizard. It will help you realize your ambition of proving to people that you are someone. - Book Quote Continues - "Well, if your sure --- better be GRYFFINDOR!" - End Quote - Harry brings up Slytherin, not the Sorting Hat, and the Sorting Hat never tries to force or advocate Slytherin. It simple wants to be clear why Harry doesn't want to be in Slytherin, and wants to make sure Harry understands that Slytherin could work to his advantage. In the end, the Hat goes with the very first characteristic it saw in Harry; plenty of courage. > Cheekyweebisom: > > I believe the need for unified houses will become greater and > greater in the last two books and worry that Harry's stubbornness > and hatred of the Slytherins will hurt him. The houses are all > different, but, I think, also all the same. > > Cheekyweebisom bboy_mn: On this, we definitely agree; at least in basic principle. I do have my own theory on it, and it has to do with the DA Club continuing in the next book as a school-wide club; which means it must be open to Slytherins. Draco and his gang will initially try to join the club, but more for the purposes of spying on Harry, looking for revenge, and attempting to disrupt the club. When Draco and friends are forced out for bad behavior, a few, very few, Slytherins will remain behind, and continue on as good students and good members of the club. I also think there will be a revelation that some extremely significant character will was a Slytherin; possibly Sirius and maybe James. I think that is one of the reasons why JKR is being vague about the houses of many of the characters in the book. Between this and discovering good Slytherins via the DA Club, Harry's attitude will completely change. I also think that one Slytherin in particular will stand out. We have frequently discussed this person, labeling them "The Good Slytherin", and have speculated that it could be the mysterious Blaise Zambini. So, while the students at the school will not be united down to the last witch and wizard, the members of the four houses will be working together toward a common goal; the defeat of Voldemort. Certainly, anyone who is not blinded by a desparate quest for power and unbridled ambition, must see that a win by Voldemort is the destruction of the ambitions of everyone but Voldemort's absolute closest supporters. For the wizard world at large, it means chaos, physical and economic destruction, depression, and the general break down of society. The world that was once prosperous with high potential for all, becomes a hopelessly disfunctional world of desperation and deprivation. You can be extremely ambitions and even ruthless, and still be reasonably logical and ethical. Only stability brings prosperity, and prosperity is the true power in the world. I think there are some clear thinking Slytherins who see this, and they will side with Dumbledore. Just a thought. bboy_mn From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Thu Nov 13 07:55:52 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 02:55:52 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. Message-ID: <10.3820e7b9.2ce49308@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84900 Hello bboy_mn at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? Between this and discovering good Slytherins via the ? DA Club, Harry's attitude will completely change. I also ? think that one Slytherin in particular will stand out. We ? have frequently discussed this person, labeling them ? "The Good Slytherin", and have speculated that it could ? be the mysterious Blaise Zambini. So, while the ? students at the school will not be united down to the ? last witch and wizard, the members of the four houses ? will be working together toward a common goal; the ? defeat of Voldemort. Obviously, it is very late and my mind is fading because on first reading this, I jumped to my book screaming that there were no Slytherin names mentioned as of yet.... and of course you meant as of yet. So I apologise to my neighbours foremost. We have yet to see any Slytherin interest in the D.A., but I think this may be due to Hermione's tactics in forming the group. Noticeably, Hermione would not seek out Slytherins because of the few we really know. However, I hope that this theory of the 'Good Slytherin' pans out in canon at some point. I think it is high time we see that NOT all Slytherins are bad. We have beaten the subject to a pulp here, but just because there 'is not a witch or wizard that went bad that wasn't in Slytherin' does not mean that they ALL are. I think to prove this point to the readers, Harry will encounter the 'Good Slytherin' as you noted. It needs to be proven. JKR is not as black and white as Good House/Bad House. So far, we have only met baddie Slytherins. Yet, we have really only met four distinctly in Harry's year- I think- Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, and Pansy Parkinson. In Harry's year, alone, that is only four of ten. ( Ten being what we know of ) Somewhere in there, there must be someone who is not evil.... However, in Oop, the Sorting Hat's new song says that Slytherin only wanted to teach those whose blood was the purest. In that one statement alone, how could Riddle OR Harry have ever been placed in Slytherin? Yes, the song changed from what we had heard previously, but this is something to question.... And, Gryffindor and Slytherin were the best of friends? Is this foreshadowing? I have even confused myself. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ffionmiles at hotmail.com Thu Nov 13 09:08:59 2003 From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:08:59 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84901 > The above statement explains Harry's reaction > to "star worship", but it doesn't answer the > question why didn't more kids in the WW try > to befriend the famous Harry Potter. > > Think about it. He is the "Boy who lived" > who "mysteriously" defeated the greatest > dark wizard of the time while only a baby. > I wrote "mysteriously" for a reason. We > know what really happened. At least, > Dumbledore's explanation of it, but most > of the WW does not. To them Harry's a > mysterious and powerful wizard, or should > I say wizard in training. > > I'd thought about this before. Here's my > take on it. I've seen several interviews > of up and coming young actors/actresses, > who have gotten a chance to work with a > big name, megabucks, movie star who in > some cases they were a fan of and many > of them have said the same thing. Once > they met the "big star" and started > talking to them, they immediately realized, > "Oh, right he/she's a person just like me.". > > I think everyone that met Harry realized > the same thing. > > In PS/SS, on the Hogwarts express, Ron > and Harry have one of those "just like me" > moments. PS/SS even says that Harry found > Ron as fascinating as Ron found him. They > took turns talking about themselves while > consuming a huge amount of chocolate. It > didnt take long for Ron to meet and get > to know Harry, not "The Boy who lived", > but Harry. > > Harry's huge fame would have caused most > of the students at Hogwarts to hang back > for a moment to see what he was going to > be like. What they saw was a kid just > like them who eats, goes to class, and > walks around Hogwarts just like they do. > > If everyone, that met Harry saw the same > thing Ron did, then I'm not surprised he's > not being fawned over. It wouldn't/shouldn't > take long to change people's perceptions > from "Boy that lived" to "Harry Potter", > once you've met him. > > Yolanda I agree. Students at Hogwarts have always been aware of Harry - but they express it my whispers, nudges behind his back, pointing him out to each other. Maybe this is because he's been in contact with 'he who must not be named'. Their parents probably talked about what life was like when LV was around in hushed voices, and their children have learnt to do the same. Harry is famous, but not for something like being on TV or singing - he's connected with an events most wizards talk about in whispers, and their children do the same. So I think the whole school was always aware ofhim, they were just wary of getting to close. fi From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 09:19:13 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:19:13 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84902 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" wrote: <<<< Matt: >>> <<<<< I agree with Steve(#84678) that a story -- like any other work -- should be valued for the factors that make it great, and cannot be expected to accomplish an infinite set of social agendas. On the other hand, I disagree with the suggestion in Steve's post, and to some extent yours, that it is ok for a bestselling author simply to ignore the fact that her book is being read by millions upon millions of children. That, to me, is like the famous athlete (and there have been many) who says "I am not a role model." Those athletes are (were) role models, like it or not. They can choose to be bad role models or good ones, but they cannot escape responsibility for their actions. I believe that Rowling is very conscious of the level of influence she wields. In some areas she has chosen not to preach; in others (personal responsibility, for instance) her books send a very clear message.>>>>> bboy_mn: Well, it's nice that we agree to some extent. But I must reiterate that the author does indeed NOT have an obligation to those millions of children reading the story. If the natural course of the story, of her artistic vision, is to drift in the direction of the most extreme SLASH fan fiction, then so be it. If that happens and the books are no longer appropriate for children, then they are free to choose to stop reading the books. Now realistically, my sick little scenerio is never going to happen, but the point remains that she must and will stay true to her artistic vision, and the reader can take it or leave it. Once she starts to modify the story to 'please' potential readers, once the reader becomes more important than the story, then the books sinks in the direction of tired old TV sit-coms; shallow, trite, and devoid of any true merit. I think that one of the reason the books are so refreshing and popular, is that JKR is dedicated to the story without regard to the readers. She is telling the story to herself, just the way she thinks the story should go, and if we want to join her on this adventure, fine, and if we choose not to, also fine; she will continue on with the journey without us. As far as the moral quality and role model aspect of these book, let me point out that every major religion has endorsed these books as having a strong moral message, and therefore, serve as an excellent moral guide and source of role models. However, we need to stop at this point and take note of the means by which JKR incorporates her moral lessons. She does it with moral ambiguity, and that is, to some extent, a conscious effort on her part. She doesn't want a book of characters drawn in black and white; she paints them in shades of grey. We have had long discussions, where sides of the discussion are polarized between 'Harry is a saint' and 'Harry is the worst little brat to ever hit the printed page', and this all stems from that moral ambiguity. Harry disobeys the rules, and does so frequently to his detriment and to the detriment of others. However, in most cases, when he breaks the rules or goes against clear and specific orders, he does so selflessly, and acts for the greater good without regard to his own personal gain or safety. How can a boy, who disobeys and breaks rules be the hero? How can he be a role model for the reader? He is, because when you look at the bigger picture, you see that Harry is a good and decent person, who always puts the value of other over himself. Many times when he breaks rules, it's because the rules are corrupt, as we see in the latest book. Other times, circumstances simply demand that there are exceptions to the rules. Rules aren't absolute, they can't cover every concievable circumstance and situation. So, sometimes, you have to write the rules as you go. Sometimes that which is good and right takes precedence over the codefied opinions of committees. A perfect example; a soldier during wartime is bound by law to unquestioningly obey orders or suffer the legal consequences. Yet when those orders demand that he commit 'Crimes Against Humanity', he has a moral and legal obligation to disobey, or suffer prosecution for war crimes. This moral ambiguity is far more powerful method of teaching morality, than any blatant in-your-face preachy moralizing pontificated lessons. In fact, the more obvious in-your-face lesson are most often discounted or ingnored. Moral ambiguity, however, demands that you look deep inside yourself and ask you own conscience if Harry is good or bad, if Sirius is good or bad, and frequenly, we find that the answer is YES, Harry is good, and yes, Harry is bad. Just like real life, the answers are not cut and dried; they are not black and white. So, in the reader's subconscious struggle to resolve the moral ambigity, they managed to stumble upon a great truth. Truly, in life, the lessons we teach ourselves are the lessons we learn the best. To be told this is right and that is wrong, will never carry the same immense moral weight as *realizing* that this is right and that is wrong. The point; so far, even though JKR has given no consideration to anyone's agenda other than her own, she has managed to tell a story that is far more morally powerful than any other book I have ever read. <<<< Matt continues: >>> <<<<< Not "prejudices"; preferences. When folks say, for instance, "I wish there were more strong female characters", they are not saying "JKR's characters do not fit my image of what women are like"; they are instead saying "there is a particular type of female character I would like to see portrayed." You can agree or disagree about their choice of words (i.e., what makes a "strong female character"). You can agree or disagree about whether the characters in the book really lack the characteristics others want to see portrayed more prominently. You can agree or disagree about whether Rowling made good choices in the characters she chose to portray. But you cannot really deny that Rowling made the choices she made, nor that those choices have an impact on the reader (and, in most cases, different impacts on different readers).>>>>> bboy_mn: When you say, "I wish there were more strong female characters" and "there is a particular type of female character I would like to see portrayed", you are stating an opinion, and as I said, opinions are like noses, everybody gets one. So, I can't say your opinion is wrong, that certainly wouldn't and shouldn't be allowed, but I can reasonably say I have a different opinion. And, at some point, once we have stated and restated these opinions, each to persuade the other, and no ground is gained, we simply have to agree to disagree. As far as yours and the wishes of others for more developed female characters, I can only say that the story isn't over yet, and I feel very confident that before it is done, you will get your wish. But in saying this, I must restate my opinion that this can only be done in the course of the natural flow of the story. If the natural flow and progress of the story demand that female characters aren't fleshed out until near the end of the book (or not at all), then I think we have to accept that. That doesn't stop us from wishing or wanting it to flow differently, but we have to accept that the author has to let the story unfold as she see it in her artistic vision. To write the books with an attempt to pacify certain aspects of the readership, in my opinion, would be the doom of the series. So, in conclusion, I whole heartedly support your (and others) desire for stronger female role models; that would be nice, but not if it compromises the integrity of the story. Just a long winded, often repeated thought. bboy_mn From belijako at online.no Thu Nov 13 09:40:12 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 09:40:12 -0000 Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84903 bboy_mn wrote: > "Hmmmm," said a small voice in his ear. "Difficult. Very Difficult. > Plenty of Courage, I see. Not a bad mind either. There's talent, oh my goodness, yes -- a nice thirst to prove yourself, now that's > interesting. ...So where shall I put you?" Harry gripped the edges of the stool and thought, 'Not Slyterin, not > Slytherin'. > Notice that it is HARRY who brings up Slytherin, not the Sorting Hat. As you will see as the quote continues, the Sorting Hat merely > interogates him as to 'why not Slytherin'. My observations on the Sorting Hat's observation. The very first thing > that catches the 'eye' of the Sorting Hat is 'plenty of courage'. I > take that to mean that the Hat sees Gryffindor characteristics in > Harry first. Then 'not a bad mind', a reference to possible Ravenclaw placement. Next, 'a nice thirst to prove yourself' which I take to reflect ambition amoung other things and relates to possible Slytherin placement. > > - Book Quote Continues - "Not Slyetherin, eh?" said the small voice. "Are you sure? You could > be great, you know, it's all here in our head, and Slytherin will help you on the way to greatness, no doubt about that -- no? ... Me: I agree! It was Harry and not the Hat who brought up Slytherin, and I also notice that the first thing the Hat observes is Harry's courage, a Gryffindor trait. So it's logical to deduce that the Hat might in fact have placed Harry in Gryffindor anyway. But notice also the Hat's reaction when it discovers Harry's "thirst to prove himself" (even though it is the last virtue it sees), which is: "..."now, that's interesting." And, "it's all there in Harry's head"... Based on the Sorting Hat's sorting in book 1 alone, there is really not much to suggest the Sorting Hat seriously considered placing Harry in Slytherin. But, then you can't overlook Harry's encounter with the Sorting Hat in book 2, which puts the whole sorting in a new light... Harry, it turns out, is very worried the Hat really wanted him in Slytherin (hm, why?). The Hat answers something like this: "So, you have been wondering whether I put you in the right house." And what answer does it give Harry? "You WOULD have done well in Slytherin." (In the book the capital letters are in italics). I find it very intriguing that the Hat refuses to say "Don't worry Harry, I wanted you in Gryffindor." Instead it insists he would have done great in Slytherin. This is NOT what Harry wanted or needed to hear at the time! I'm not saying the Hat was wrong about putting him in Gryffindor. What I am saying is that I think Rowling is trying to tell the reader something here :-) She denies Harry any assurance of being placed right. Now, why is that? True, Dumbledore assures him at the end of the book that he is a true Gryffindor. But still I wonder why the Hat didn't bother to do it. According to the Hat itself, it has never been wrong. But, it seemingly can't make up its mind on Harry's house... Or, maybe it HAS made up its mind and IS right: Maybe, in some way or another, Harry belongs as much to the Slytherin house as to the Gryffindor house. That way it was really Harry's choice that landed him in Gryffindor since his characteristics alone could have landed him in either one. Berit From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 10:09:57 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 10:09:57 -0000 Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. In-Reply-To: <10.3820e7b9.2ce49308@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84904 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > Hello bboy_mn at y..., > > In reference to your comment: > > Between this and discovering good Slytherins via the > DA Club, Harry's attitude will completely change. I also > think that one Slytherin in particular will stand out. We > have frequently discussed this person, labeling them > "The Good Slytherin", and have speculated that it could > be the mysterious Blaise Zambini. So, while the > students at the school will not be united down to the > last witch and wizard, the members of the four houses > will be working together toward a common goal; the > defeat of Voldemort. > > Tonks: > > Obviously, it is very late and my mind is fading because on first > reading this, I jumped to my book screaming that there were no > Slytherin names mentioned as of yet.... and of course you meant as > of yet. bboy_mn: Actually, Blaise Zambini is named during the sorting ceremony in PS/SS and sorted into Slytherin. In GoF, Malcolm Baddock and Graham Pritchard are sorted into Slytherin. These names are mentioned but so far, other than sorting, have never been used in the story. Blaise Zambini's name is sneaked in at the very end of the PS/SS sorting ceremony. The casual way that it was slipped into the story makes this character very suspicious, and many of us are convinced he will play a larger role later in the story. > Tonks: > > ...We have yet to see any Slytherin interest in the D.A., ... > bboy_mn: Remember that my theory on this is based on the belief that when school starts again for the 6th year, the DA Club will become an official school club. In becoming an officially recognised school club, the membership must then be open to the entire school. Otherwise, it's not a school club, but a private club. I believe that Dumbledore will see this as first a good way for the students to get training; certainly a million times better than Lockharts worthless dueling club. And, Dumbledore will see it as a way to get the houses all working together, even if it does result in a little conflict. Dumbledore has never seemed the type to actively avoid a little chaos when it comes his way, so chaos and conflict in the DA Club will not be enough to dissuade him. > Tonks: > > I think to prove this point to the readers, Harry will encounter the > 'Good Slytherin' as you noted. It needs to be proven. JKR is not as > black and white as Good House/Bad House. Somewhere in there, there > must be someone who is not evil.... > bboy_mn: I've never accepted the belief that all Slytherins are bad, or for that matter, even saw the logic of interpreting statements in the book in that fashion. People make generalizations all the time. Certainly, Gryffindor's are brave heroes but let's face it, most Gryffindors that we see in Harry's class are just students going to school. Perhaps brave if tested, but unlike Harry, they live normal lives and are never tested. Just kids going to school, nothing more. Same with Slytherins; Draco is the most obvious because he makes all the noise and causes all the trouble, but what about all those Slytherins that we never hear about? Thoroughly evil or just a bunch of kids going to school? My vote is for, just kids going to school. Sure, they are very ambitious, but I can see a ruthlessly ambitious Slytherin being against Voldemort because they see that Voldemort is incapable of running a stable country. No stability = no prosperity, and no prosperity means the ambitions of these students are shot to hell (pardon the French). Proceeding through life with an absolute ingrained desire to become successful and wealthy are not the automatic hallmarks of evil. > Tonks: > > However, in Oop, the Sorting Hat's new song says that Slytherin only > wanted to teach those whose blood was the purest. In that one > statement alone, how could Riddle OR Harry have ever been placed in > Slytherin? > > I have even confused myself. > -Tonks bboy_mn: Mr. Slytherin WANTED to teach those who's blood was pure, but he didn't get it. The other founders overruled him, and that's why he left. I don't see the fact that Slytherin had a preference for pure blood a thousand years ago, and given the fact that he left the school disgruntled, as in anyway preventing less than pure bloods from being sorted into Slytherin house today. Certainly if you are cunning and ambitious, and driven to succeed, you meet enough of the qualifications to be sorted into Slytherin house. The sorting seems to be based on personality characteristics. I can't see the Sorting Hat carrying Mr. Slytherin preference for pure blood a thousand years into the future, not when it also has the combined characteristics of the other three founders in it. Of course, that's just a thought. bboy_mn From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 12:10:27 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 04:10:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Avada Kedavra Meaning Message-ID: <20031113121027.42681.qmail@web40004.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84905 13Nov03 From: Troels Forchhammer wrote: ...the Spell Encyclopedia of the Lexicon..includes the derivations and etymologies of every spell, including Avada Kedavra (which is Aramaic, by the way). Do you know the meaning of the individual words of the killing curse? And/or the transliteration from Aramaic?... I've searched a few sites in an attempt to learn which part expresses the wish and which part expresses the destruction... Paula now: OK, but Aramaic is a later form of the Hebrew language after the Babylonian Captivity, sixth century before the common era. It became the "Esperanta" of the day in the Middle East. "Avada" is from the root "to destroy". "Kedavra" is "as a plague". Sorry, but my knowledge of Aramaic grammar is not as strong as Hebrew, but I suspect that it works much the same. That is, a verb in the future tense is used to express a wish. ~Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 13 12:16:54 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:16:54 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84906 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > > Kneasy, I don't know about any of the other authors Laura mentioned, > but a quick search of Google groups will show you that charges of > racism and sexism are repeatedly being hurled at Tolkien for making > Orcs innately evil and Dwarves (except Gimli) a little too interested > in gold and jewels while Elves are (ostensibly) innately good. JKR is > far from the only author who is subjected to this sort of criticism > (in the ordinary sense of the word). Kneasy: OK, I admit that is happening on other sites, (motto - if I've told you once, I've told you a million times, don't exaggerate) *but* I would expect that those who sniff out fashionable heresies would realise that LotR is not all that modern. True, it was first published in the fifties, but its genesis goes back to the thirties. Back then the term 'sexism' hadn't been thought of and stereotypes were generally accepted as a sort of convenient short-hand in popular fiction. As an aside, I like his dwarves - staunch, brave, outspoken, violent, just like a good prop-forward, but his elves make me cringe. Such compassion and goodness needs to be severely punished IMO. Similarly, so do the *new* stereotypes so often found in current fiction. To me, they are such 'right on', politically approved and immaculate reflections of the image many proslytising activists seem to want to promote that I wonder if a new and insidious form of censorship is being imposed in the name of balance. I wonder, what would the chattering classes say if books like Lord of the Flies, Heart of Darkness, Great Expectations, etc. etc. were to be published now. Lots of comments about lack of well-fleshed out female characters? No strong positive female roles in Dickens latest epic? Unacceptable because all the female leads have negative characteristics? You may think I'm exaggerating again, but I have a niggling memory that reminds me that 'bowdlerised' is a term with a long history. Take the story lines you like and remove the unacceptable. Bowdler did it with sex; is it now the turn of sexism? Certainly this is starting to happen in film and TV adaptations of some older works. It worries me. > > In JKR's case, it's self-evident that she's opposed to racism and > discrimination against people who are different in any way (with the > possible exception of the giants, who do seem rather subhuman--Hagrid > and Madame Maxime as half-giants not included). I for one think her > politics are a little too transparent and that the House Elf business > comes a bit too close to allegory (it seems too closely patterned on > American pre-Civil War slavery just as Voldemort is patterned in part > on Hitler, by JKR's own admission). In any case, we can refute the > charges of stereotyping simply by looking at the House Elves. Dobby, > Winky, and Kreacher may all speak like variations of Gollum, but they > have distinctly different personalities. In fact, the only two > characters who seem to me to be stereotyped are Crabbe and Goyle, who > are virtually indistinguishable except for their heights and haircuts, > and I confess that it would be hard to avoid stereotyping in their > case. They're intended as "flat," "static" characters in any case, to > borrow E.M. Forster's terms. Their sole purpose is to bolster Draco in > his role as bully without having any real identity themselves. > Hmm. I wonder if I'm reading you correctly. Or vice versa. My original complaint was not with any supposed stereotypes perpetrated by JKR, (I made more or less the same point about the three elves), but with the stereotypes that some of the posters want to impose on JKR in order to make her tale *better*. This I would consider a heinous crime. It's her story, she'll write it her way and if you (the fans) don't like it, tough. Accept it for what it is and if you think you can do better, go right ahead. Complaints about the fate of imaginary beings, gender balance or poor role models seem pointless, especially as the tale has some way to go before the loose ends are tied and all is revealed. It all hinges on personal attitudes. I refuse to allow anyone to determine what I think and what I should believe. Maybe I'm a freak, an anachronism. But the current trend in society of imposed mental hygiene - think this or you are to be shunned or castigated - makes me take a contrary view just to be bloody-minded. > I hope this helps to cheer you up. That was my intention, anyway. Thanks for the thought, but a couple of beers would be better. Kneasy From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 13:02:18 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 13:02:18 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84907 > > The Sergeant Majorette says > > In the first four books, > > he's a scrawny little four-eyed geek who keeps getting slapped > upside the head by life. Then he adolesces, and it's not pretty. > > Geoff: > Look, as a scrawny little (sometimes four-eyed... reading glasses!) geek, I intend to form a society for the advancement and support of four eyed geeks. The world runs on us rather than on the brawn and sex appeal of characters like Brad Pitt or Jude Law or (sorry Laura) Orli. Your ratty kid has done more for the WW in fifteen years than George Bush for the RW in four. > > Consider your wrists smacked. > > :-)) Laura: Duly noted. *smiles* That, of course, was the Sgt Majorette's point-heroes rarely conform to Hollywood stereotypes. LV, in his Vapormort and Tom Riddle incarnations, underestimated our boy Harry for precisely the reasons the Sgt Majorette lays out. And he gets what he deserves. (Kneasy, is LV guilty of stereotyping Harry? ) Geeks rule! And I'm willing to bash Bush with anyone on the list, anytime, anyplace (cheekyweebisom, are you listening?)! From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 13 07:40:49 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 07:40:49 -0000 Subject: Avada Kedavra Meaning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84908 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Geoff: > > There are other examples in HP of possible misuse. The curses should, > > I think have a "-us" (Nominative) ending; Cruciatus, Imperius etc. > > whereas the command word is a Vocative; Crucio, Imperio etc. > > Carol: > My Latin is shaky, too, and it's been a very long time since I read > any, but I was thinking that the -o in "Crucio," "Imperio," etc., was > a verb ending indicating a first-person "doer," as in "amo" (I love). > So "imperio" would be "I command." (A vocative is a noun or name used > in direct address, e.g., "Brute" for "Brutus," which seems > inappropriate here.) In any case, I think we're dealing with two > different parts of speech here, nouns and verbs. In other words, the > spoken form of the curse is a verb, the name of the curse is a noun. I > agree that -em looks like an accusative form, which seems odd, but > -us in "Cruciatus" and "Imperius" is nominative, as we would expect. Geoff again: My apologies. What I /meant/ to say re Crucio, Imperio etc. is that they are Imperatives - i.e. command words like "Jump!" or "Be silent!". Where's the iron gone this time? I suppose the use of Latin probably stems from the fact that, in days gone by, it was a language spoken by the well-educated, was of course also the language of the established Church and thus acted internationally as a "lingua franca" much as English does today. From liz at studylink.com Thu Nov 13 10:40:21 2003 From: liz at studylink.com (liz) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:40:21 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna Oh my! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84909 on 13/11/03 2:36 am, vecseytj at vecseytj at tampabay.rr.com wrote: > Harry is like the favorite brother who come home for Sunday dinner and > bring along the girl of his dreams. Harry (I mean our > brother)admires the lovely charming girl whom he loves dearly. We on > the other hand see a hair lip and glasses, with a laugh like a frog. > Who's right? Is it just that our brother (harry) is so wonderful that > NO girl is good enough or is it that Harry is being blinded by a "love > potion?" > > I don't know, but I did get that impression with Cho (in the OOP) that > everyone just wanted to string her up from the highest tree. I~ think > that Harry is going to ride off into the sunset with old Cho, but no > one belives me. And do you what to know why I think this is going to > happen? 'Cause I can't stand Cho. (and honestly and truely this is > the only reason) And that is how it usally works out with your fav... > sibling... they marry someone you can't imagin being part of your > family. it's not that they are not nice or fun or that your sib > doesn't love them... it's just that we wanted perfect, and Harry.. i > mean our sibling just wants love. Ha! I love your reasoning here but I reach a different conclusion, because Harry is also brother/friend/son/alter ego of JK. I got the feeling that she, along with us, really delighted in Cho ultimately being unworthy of Harry. She didn't make Cho just unlikeable, she made her contemptuous and pathetic. I don't think she's going to let Cho anywhere near Harry in the future. Also I don't see Harry getting much love from Cho anyway. They admired each other superficially but underneath they had no spark, no connection, no understanding, nothing. Liz From vinnia_chrysshallie at yahoo.co.nz Thu Nov 13 14:17:30 2003 From: vinnia_chrysshallie at yahoo.co.nz (=?iso-8859-1?q?Vinnia?=) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 03:17:30 +1300 (NZDT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031113141730.69500.qmail@web41211.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84910 I wrote: I strongly suspect that one of Lily's parents is still alive. He(or she) could not take Harry in, because his(her)blood is only half of Lily's blood. Harry would probably get to meet Mr/Mrs. Evans in book 6/early book 7, through Mark Evans. Carol replied: I agree that Mark Evans is important (and distantly related to Harry), but if his parents were Lily's grandparents, Dumbledore would not repeatedly have referred to Petunia as Harry's "only living relative." Also the ages are wrong. Mark is ten years old in OotP and unlikely to be L and P's first cousin. Me again: Sorry, Carol, I should have explained clearer. I did not mean Harry's grandparents are Mark's parents. What I meant was that Harry's maternal grandparents are Mark's paternal grandparents. And only one of them is still living, not both. As to Petunia being Harry's "only living relative": --start quote-- PS/SS ch 1: "They're the only family he has left now." Oop p 736 Bloomsbury: "I delivered you to her sister, her only remaining relative." --end quote Family could mean someone who shared your blood, or a social unit, a father and a mother and possibly sibling(s). If Mark's father was not married when DD made this comment, then he's a living relative, but not family. The second quote would kill my theory, but I will make a feeble attempt to defend it What if DD means her only relative that stays behind(in the muggle world)? Mark's father could have been a wizard. And his mom/dad could be staying in the magical world. Though not magical, he/she could be a shopkeeper or a tutor for under-11 magical children or muggle studies professor or something like that. The ministry doesn't have a record of any wizards living in little whinging other than Harry, probably because Mark's father is no longer living? Or divorced and living somewhere else? Jennifer wrote: Do we know that Lily's parents were muggles? In some discussions a few weeks ago, we were surmising the magical possiblities of Dudley and Petunia. Some people believe that Lily is trying to squash the magic out of Dudley because Lily wouldn't be able to stand her own flesh and blood as a wizard, something she hates more than anything else. But I believe that Petunia is a wizard, rather want-to-be- wizard. Vinnia: You meant Petunia, not Lily, right? Jennifer: Personally, I think that Petunia is a squib and that her family was a modest wizarding family way back. Petunia was jealous of her sister why? Because she had the magic and was welcomed to Hogwarts. Her parents were proud and happy because they only got a squib with her. Her hatred of the wizarding world stems from the fact that Petunia was denied a great gift. Vinnia: We're all entitled to our own opinion of course, but I'd be really disappointed if Lily had any magical ancestry in the last 9 generations. Harry is not perfect. By giving Lily a magical ancestry, it makes Harry more perfect in the WW (more pureblood). I prefer Harry to be a half-blood. If Lily's muggle-born, then Voldemort was vanguished by someone who has muggle blood, the very thing Voldemort hates. Jennifer: At the end of OoP we learned that Petunia is knowledgable of Dementors. As a squib she would be able to see them and know of their horror. If her family were muggles the Evans family would know nothing of any magic prior to Lily going off the school and I'm sure that Petunia severed all magical ties with her sister. Vinnia: Petunia also likes to snoop around. Who says she did not peek into Lily's textbook when Lily was out? Other alternative: Petunia was forced to come with her parents to pick Lily up from King's cross. A boy (could be James/Sirius) said," Have a good summer, Evans, don't get kissed by a dementor!" or something similar. Lily's mom/dad asked the boy what a dementor is and he explained. Jennifer: When they did see each other, I'm sure they were not discussing Dementors and blast ended screwts. Vinnia: Agreed. What a morbid topic to discuss over dinner! Of course, those are just my humble opinions. Vinnia http://personals.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Personals New people, new possibilities. FREE for a limited time. From suzchiles at msn.com Thu Nov 13 15:02:02 2003 From: suzchiles at msn.com (Suzanne Chiles) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 07:02:02 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Awkward Squad, was: Re: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84911 Janet said: > Draco isn't *any* of these things. The only thing he's good at, that we've > seen, is Quiddich, Have we seen that he's good s Quidditch? I just got through re-reading CoS, and he was a mediocre player at best. Suzanne From suzchiles at msn.com Thu Nov 13 15:20:08 2003 From: suzchiles at msn.com (Suzanne Chiles) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 07:20:08 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Heir of other houses References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84912 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hp_lexicon" wrote: > After a thousand years, it is highly unlikely that they know who is > the direct heir of anyone. I don't think it's even possible to trace > an heir over that many centuries. Everything about the Founders is > shrouded in mystery and legend. The dates aren't even precise. Why would that be true? I have my ancestors traced back as far as Charlemagne. And in Book 5, we see that the Black family had a serious interest in genealogy. Suzanne From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 16:02:51 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 16:02:51 -0000 Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84913 Steve wrote (in a post with which I completely agree): > Notice that it is HARRY who brings up Slytherin, not the Sorting > Hat. As you will see as the quote continues, the Sorting Hat merely > > interogates him as to 'why not Slytherin'. My observations on the > Sorting Hat's observation. The very first thing > > that catches the 'eye' of the Sorting Hat is 'plenty of courage'. Berit replied: So it's logical to deduce that the Hat might in > fact have placed Harry in Gryffindor anyway. But notice also the > Hat's reaction when it discovers Harry's "thirst to prove himself" > (even though it is the last virtue it sees), which is: "..."now, > that's interesting." And, "it's all there in Harry's head"... [...] > But, then you can't overlook Harry's encounter > with the Sorting Hat in book 2, which puts the whole sorting in a new > light... Harry, it turns out, is very worried the Hat really wanted > him in Slytherin (hm, why?). The Hat answers something like > this: "So, you have been wondering whether I put you in the right > house." And what answer does it give Harry? "You WOULD have done well > in Slytherin." (In the book the capital letters are in italics). Annemehr: Oh, but that's not quite accurate. The hat actually said: "you WOULD have done well in Slytherin --" ending in a dash, not a period. Harry heard that phrase and immediately yanked the hat off his head without letting it finish. For all we know, the hat would have finished up by telling Harry that he did indeed belong in Gryffindor. Berit: > I find it very intriguing that the Hat refuses to say "Don't worry > Harry, I wanted you in Gryffindor." Instead it insists he would have > done great in Slytherin. This is NOT what Harry wanted or needed to > hear at the time! I'm not saying the Hat was wrong about putting him > in Gryffindor. What I am saying is that I think Rowling is trying to > tell the reader something here :-) She denies Harry any assurance of > being placed right. Now, why is that? Annemehr: Following on the idea that the hat was interrupted, I think this is what was happening: the hat saw in Harry's mind the worry that he should have been placed in Slytherin rather than Gryffindor, so it began by reconsidering the possibility of the first *before* (I believe) it would have gone on to deal with the second. We know by now that JKR often interrupts someone just as they are about to say something important (as in OoP just when Hagrid is about to name the Slytherin boy who can see the thestral), and that is what is happening here. The hat does *not* refuse to reassure Harry, JKR does. I think the reason why is because Harry needs more than just to be *told* that he is a true Gryffindor. He needs to be able to see it for himself, which he can only do after the events down in the chamber of secrets. True, even then Dumbledore had to explain it to him, but once he sees it was Godric Gryffindor's sword that came to him, he "gets it." Berit: > But, [the hat] seemingly can't make up its mind on > Harry's house... Or, maybe it HAS made up its mind and IS right: > Maybe, in some way or another, Harry belongs as much to the Slytherin > house as to the Gryffindor house. That way it was really Harry's > choice that landed him in Gryffindor since his characteristics alone > could have landed him in either one. Annemehr: There is no way to prove it, but I am sure that Gryffindor is the best house for Harry and the hat knows it. I agree Harry's choice was one of the characteristics that put him there, along with his courage and nobility. Or perhaps it's more accurate to say that Harry's choice is the manifestation of the characteristics that put him in Gryffindor. I am also one who believes that most of the students, including Harry, do exhibit characteristics of all the houses in varying degrees. But, after following Harry through five books, I have to say that it's pretty obvious to me that he truly is a Gryffindor at heart. To return to Berit's parenthetical question as to why Harry is so worried that the hat wanted to put him in Slytherin, the bulk of the answer is contained in CoS ch. 11, "The Dueling Club." Harry finds out he's a Parselmouth, that they're rare, and that Salazar Slytherin was one which is why the House symbol is a snake. Then Harry is panicked to be told that, for all anyone knows, he could be Slytherin's descendant. Lying awake that night, he fears that he has Slytherin blood, and that the hat *wanted* to put him in Slytherin (obviously I think Harry's mistaken on that point). IMO, and this is the conclusion we are left to draw ourselves, Harry fears that belonging in Slytherin would mean that he's a Dark Wizard at heart. This anti-Slytherin bias of his is something he has yet to unlearn, but it is in character for it to worry him at the time given how unsure of himself he felt in PS/SS during his entrance into the Wizarding World, combined with what he was told then about Dark Wizards coming from Slytherin. To me, this is answer enough to your question, but perhaps it's not quite convincing to everyone? Annemehr who can never seem to lay off "Harry should have been Slytherin" threads... From liz at studylink.com Thu Nov 13 10:50:58 2003 From: liz at studylink.com (liz) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:50:58 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Heir of other houses In-Reply-To: <00d301c3a985$48925540$e34b0043@hppav> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84914 Troels wrote: >> Surely this view is an oversimplification. For one thing, it leaves >> out Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff, which would also be "good" in this view. >> Look at Cedric Diggory, eulogized by Dumbledore and mourned by the >> whole school--even the Slytherins. Look at Dolores Umbridge, who is >> indisputably evil, but neither a Slytherin nor a Death Eater. then Eric said: > As far as I can remember, we never find out _which_ House Dolores Umbridge > was in during her time at Hogwarts. For that matter, if she hadn't > mentioned being happy to be _back_ at Hogwarts, I'd have to say that we > wouldn't know for sure if she even _was_ a Hogwarts Old Girl. She _could_ > have been educated at Beauxbatons, Durmstrang, the Salem Witches' Institute, > or one of the smaller schools in Europe. I know it is never stated but I always got the feeling that Umbridge was a Slytherin. She's certainly ambitious and cunning though not particularly clever, loyal or brave; she is very interested in keeping the Wizarding world pure; she favours the Slytherins, allowing their Quidditch team to play straight away and even making some of them her own little police squad; and her winter wear is a green hat and cloak!! I'd be pretty surprised if she was anything else. Liz From liz at studylink.com Thu Nov 13 11:17:58 2003 From: liz at studylink.com (liz) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:17:58 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84915 Kneasy said: >> Even a superficial analysis of the text militates >> against Elvish slavery. They are too strongly magical, >> the majority seem happy in their role and the bee in >> Hermione's bonnet is not supported by *anyone* in the >> canon, not soft-hearted Hagrid, not compassionate >> Dumbledore. Doesn't that tell you something? Then Matt said: > Why does no one support Hermione? There is a whole list of possible > alternatives to the reason that your rhetorical question seems to be > aimed at: > 6) In the case of Dumbledore, his abstinence may just be another > example of leaving students to their own devices in order to fuel > their self-determination. Liz here: I think Dumbledore does support a change in the circumstances of elves, just not in the vociferous way Hermione does. He takes Dobby and Winky in as a completely free elves, offers to pay them more than they want and tells Dobby he can call him a 'balmy old codger' (I love that line). He stresses the importance of treating Kreacher well, and he said something to the effect that Kreacher is what he was made by wizards, indicating to me an awareness that changes need to be made to stop more Kreachers being created. I just think DD, being somewhat older and wiser than Hermione, knows that sudden freedom for all elves would be disastrous for the elves and the WW. DD seems to me to be the kind of person who prefers to influence ethical issues by his living example and by giving advice when it is asked for or when he senses receptivity, whereas Hermione does it by preaching and constantly offering unasked for advice. I do however think their ethical outlooks and goals are quite similar. Liz From liwy_500 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 16:11:18 2003 From: liwy_500 at yahoo.com (LIWY) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 16:11:18 -0000 Subject: Riddle Senior Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84916 I've been thinking a lot recently about just what Tom Riddle, Senior was like personally. He's described negatively, of course, but to what extent are Riddle Jr's descriptions accurate? It's really hard to tell, but has anyone else ever thought about this? From chiara.fantoni at cec.eu.int Thu Nov 13 16:03:07 2003 From: chiara.fantoni at cec.eu.int (chiara.fantoni at cec.eu.int) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:03:07 +0100 Subject: Mark Evans Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84917 urghiggi wrote: >One other "out" I've seen proposed, that ostensibly would allow Mark to be >related AND allow Ddore's credibility to remain intact, is the interp that >Petunia WAS the only living relative at the time Harry was turned over to the >Durselys and that Mark was born later (which of course he would have to >have been, given his age). But for Mark to be a living relative, then one of his >PARENTS, who surely were around at that time, also has to be a living >relative, which blows up the argument.... >Then again -- Dudley Dursley was born a month before Harry, apparently, >and so at the time of the hand-off he, too, was a "living relative" of Lily Potter >(unless he's Vernon's love child with someone other than Petunia). Now -- did >the fact that Ddore didn't mention this mean anything (like, Ddore's really not >to be trusted to be accurate/truthful)? Or did it just mean that, as an infant, >Dudley certainly couldn't be a potential party for useful employment of the >blood-charm, and thus wasn't worth mentioning? But if that's the case, are >there OTHER Evanses out there who weren't suitable, and thus not >mentioned? In which case, Mark could certainly be related somehow. We know from canon that WW kids get their family name from their father, just like in Western RL (otherwise it would be Harry Evans, not Harry Potter, and it's Arthur Weasley and Molly what?) There is a conspicuous exception in Iceland, but here we are talking about UK. Is there any canon stating that the only sibling Lily had is Petunia? What if they had a brother as well? His children would be called Evans, wouldn't they? Mark is ten at the beginning of OOP, so not only he is younger than Harry, but he was also born after James and Lily were killed, he hadn't even been conceived, unless witches have a longer pregnancy than normal women (they are not elephants, or are they?) So if we accept the theory that "only living relative" might be referring to the moment Harry is made an orphan, Mark is still to come into play, his father might have conceived him and then died for whatever reason, and his mother might have died in the intervening years. Any thoughts? Chiara From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 16:51:49 2003 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 08:51:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031113165149.26765.qmail@web20007.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84918 --- chiara.fantoni at cec.eu.int wrote: > So if we accept the theory that "only living > relative" might be referring to > the moment Harry is made an orphan, Mark is still to > come into play, his > father might have conceived him and then died for > whatever reason, and his > mother might have died in the intervening years. > > Any thoughts? > > Chiara But if Mark's father wasn't alive when Harry was made an orphan Mark wouldn't be alive (unless the guy had his sperm frozen). Mark is five years yonger than Harry. It seems more feasible to me that they were referring to adult relatives and that Mark's dad was still a teenager - he could've been with a foster family or something) Rebecca ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 13 16:57:34 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 16:57:34 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84919 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: > > Laura: > That, of course, was the Sgt Majorette's point-heroes rarely conform > to Hollywood stereotypes. LV, in his Vapormort and Tom Riddle > incarnations, underestimated our boy Harry for precisely the reasons > the Sgt Majorette lays out. And he gets what he deserves. (Kneasy, > is LV guilty of stereotyping Harry? ) > Kneasy: Oh yes. Voldemort stereotypes everybody - including himself. I mean, a totally black outfit; white face and red eyes? And a pet snake? Where's his style? Any self respecting villain should at least invest in a good tailor, for heavens sake. He should smarten himself up a bit, a nicely draped gown, mohair would be good, with a hint of cabbalistic signs woven into the lapels. Patent leather shoes, of course, with the cuban heels and silver buckles. If you want to rule the world, it helps to make a favourable first impression. Laura: > And I'm willing to bash Bush with anyone on the list, anytime, > anyplace Kneasy: Well, Kate Bush isn't exactly a favourite of mine, either. But she wasn't that bad, surely? From meltowne at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 17:04:43 2003 From: meltowne at yahoo.com (meltowne) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:04:43 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84920 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "alshainofthenorth" wrote: > Yes, there are male archetypes in the stories as well. Yes, some of > them never develops. Yes, Draco seems to be frozen in his role as > nemesis. That's the point. > Male character with zero development = boring male character. > Female character with zero development = boring female character. > More female characters with zero development = more boring female > characters. > > I'm choosing to believe that JKR does this deliberately, and that as > Harry starts realising that girls aren't just long-haired cootie > bearers but persons in their own right, the female characters will > start to develop. > > Alshain Absolutely - remember we are seeing everything from Harry's POV. Thus, if he's not interested in someone, we are not likely to know much about them. It might be interesting to read this story from Hermione's perspective, since she is more curious than Harry. Many of the characters fit stereotypes because that's how Harry sees them - what he notices about them. Consider many of the people you know in your town - not your close friends, but people who you pass in the street on a regular basis - what do you know about them? How would you characterize them to somebody else? From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Thu Nov 13 17:17:33 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:17:33 -0000 Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84921 bboy_mn wrote: I think it's time to go back to the exact details of what happened during the sorting ceremony. -HP and the Sorcerer's Stone; Am PB Pg 130- Next second he was looking at the black inside of the hat. He waited. "Hmmmm," said a small voice in his ear. "Difficult. Very Difficult. Plenty of Courage, I see. Not a bad mind either. There's talent, oh my goodness, yes -- a nice thrist to prove yourself, now that's interesting. ...So where shall I put you?" Harry gripped the edges of the stool and thought, 'Not Slyterin, not Slytherin'. - end this part - Notice that it is HARRY who brings up Slytherin, not the Sorting Hat. As you will see as the quote continues, the Sorting Hat merely interogates him as to 'why not Slytherin'. My observations on the Sorting Hat's observation. The very first thing that catches the 'eye' of the Sorting Hat is 'plenty of courage'. I take that to mean that the Hat sees Gryffindor characteristics in Harry first. Then 'not a bad mind', a reference to possible Ravenclaw placement. Next, 'a nice thirst to prove yourself' which I take to reflect ambition amoung other things and relates to possible Slytherin placement. - Book Quote Continues - "Not Slyetherin, eh?" said the small voice. "Are you sure? You could be great, you know, it's all here in our head, and Slytherin will help you on the way to greatness, no doubt about that -- no? ... - end this part - In a sense, the Hat is saying, 'why not Slytherin?'. It will help you fulfill your greatness, and help you prove to the world that you are a great and powerful wizard. It will help you realize your ambition of proving to people that you are someone. - Book Quote Continues - "Well, if your sure --- better be GRYFFINDOR!" - End Quote - Harry brings up Slytherin, not the Sorting Hat, and the Sorting Hat never tries to force or advocate Slytherin. It simple wants to be clear why Harry doesn't want to be in Slytherin, and wants to make sure Harry understands that Slytherin could work to his advantage. In the end, the Hat goes with the very first characteristic it saw in Harry; plenty of courage. ----------------------------------- ARYA NOW: I've always looked at the actual words the Sorting Hat said as being a test for whether Harry really belonged in Slytherin. The Hat tempts him with "greatness" and even recognizes a "thirst to prove yourself" as well as tempts further with "you gcould be great, you know". All these things, to someone with Slytherin ambition, are tempting and would lure a true Slytherin to think that would be the House for them. But rather, Harry is NOT tempted by the possibility of "help you on your way to greatness", greatness is not his ambition. His thirst to prove himself is then reattributed from a wish to be great but to a much more noble (Gryffindor) ideal of perhaps, just being with the friend he has just made and not in the house with some kid who reminded him of Dudley. I say the Sorting Hat's words were a test. If Harry would have truly had all the ideals of a Slytherin, he would have been tempted by the Hat's words and would have been glad to be placed there. Even in CoS then, the Hat only says "I stand by what I said, you would have done well in slytherin." Harry kind of cuts it off and I belive the unspoken last part of the Sorting Hat's explanation is "...if you would have aspired to greatness when I presented you with the opportunity." Arya From belijako at online.no Thu Nov 13 17:23:15 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:23:15 -0000 Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84922 Annemehr wrote: > To return to Berit's parenthetical question as to why Harry is so > worried that the hat wanted to put him in Slytherin, the bulk of the > answer is contained in CoS ch. 11, "The Dueling Club." Harry finds > out he's a Parselmouth, that they're rare, and that Salazar Slytherin > was one which is why the House symbol is a snake. Then Harry is > panicked to be told that, for all anyone knows, he could be > Slytherin's descendant. Lying awake that night, he fears that he has > Slytherin blood, and that the hat *wanted* to put him in Slytherin > (obviously I think Harry's mistaken on that point). IMO, and this is > the conclusion we are left to draw ourselves, Harry fears that > belonging in Slytherin would mean that he's a Dark Wizard at heart. > This anti-Slytherin bias of his is something he has yet to unlearn, Me: I think your answer makes sense Annemehr :-) But, the reason I think Rowling makes Harry only hear the first part of the Hat's "speech" in CoS is not only because he needed to experience firsthand that he is a real Gryffindor, but also because Rowling leaves a lot of clues in CoS about Harry's connection to the Slytherin house in general and to Voldemort in particular. The book is just littered with hints that Harry is not ONLY a true Gryffindor... He seems also to have inherited something from Voldemort, whether only accidental or not I don't know, but I don't think parseltongue is the only thing that makes Harry "equal" to old Voldie... Berit From belijako at online.no Thu Nov 13 17:35:37 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:35:37 -0000 Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84923 Arya wrote: If Harry would have truly > had all the ideals of a Slytherin, he would have been tempted by the > Hat's words and would have been glad to be placed there. Even in CoS > then, the Hat only says "I stand by what I said, you would have done > well in slytherin." Harry kind of cuts it off and I belive the > unspoken last part of the Sorting Hat's explanation is "...if you > would have aspired to greatness when I presented you with the > opportunity." Me: I know, I know :-) You're right! But you must admit it is kind of suspicious that Rowling chooses to let Harry remove the Hat before it has finished it's little explanatory speech? I just think she does that for a reason, and I don't think it's only to let Harry find out for himself he is a Gryffindor. At a lot of other places in CoS she does the same thing: Presents Harry with information to make him worry whether he belongs to the Slytherin house rather than the Gryffindor house; why, he even fears he is the Heir of Slytherin himself! Now, the book ends with telling us Voldemort is the Heir and not Harry, and that Harry is a true Gryffindor. But the reader is left hanging with a lot of loose ends; a lot of strange clues as to what really is the relationship between Harry and the heir of Slytherin, Lord Voldemort. Even Tom Riddle himself is puzzled and intrigued by the likenesses between himself and Harry... And with the extra information we get in OoP, we now know that Voldemort marked Harry as his EQUAL... Well, I'll stop there :-) Berit From tminton at deckerjones.com Thu Nov 13 17:37:17 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:37:17 -0600 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE46264D@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84924 Ok here is another theory.....(or course someone probably already came up with it, but it is new to me!! I hope that is ok!!) What if Percy was always on the dark side and HE KNEW what Scabbers/Peter REALLY was and and Part of the big plan was to give/plant him to/on Ron so that Peter would be in place to keep an eye on Harry and wait for a chance to serve up Harry on a platter to He who must not be named. I just don't have one of those evil calculating, manipulative minds so go easy one me!! What do you think?? Possible?? If we have already been through this one could you point me to the correct posts?? Thanks I couldn't find them!! Tonya [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Thu Nov 13 17:45:51 2003 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:45:51 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Mark Evans In-Reply-To: <20031113165149.26765.qmail@web20007.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20031113174551.38408.qmail@web25107.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84925 --- chiara.fantoni at cec.eu.int wrote: > So if we accept the theory that "only living > relative" might be referring to > the moment Harry is made an orphan, Mark is still to > come into play, his > father might have conceived him and then died for > whatever reason, and his > mother might have died in the intervening years. > > Any thoughts? > > Chiara U_P_D Are we all barking up the wrong tree here? When Wizards talk about blood do they mean full blood? i.e. same mum, same dad In which case their is all kinds of scope for Mark Evans to be even quite closly related to Harry, Udder Pendragon __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --------------------------------- Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 17:33:47 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:33:47 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84926 Carol wrote: > But if the Sorting Hat has "never yet been wrong," how did Percy get > into Gryffindor? I hope he shows some true courage in the next two books. > > Carol Hermowninny now: I think Percy has already shown courage. It's not easy to stand up for what you believe when your entire family says you're wrong. Imagine the pressure he was under by his parents and siblings, yet he still went with what he believed was right. It turned out that he was wrong--that puts his whole situation in a negative light. If he had turned out to be right, he would have been applauded for standing up for right against outstanding odds. I think this shows courage--stupidity, lack of faith, etc.--but courage nonetheless. Not just in OOP, but in all previous books, she shows courage in his self-confidence. Even though he's surrouned by people who think he's a humongous bighead--He holds his ground and doesn't change who he is just to please brothers, parents, friends, etc. Yes, Percy is courageous--a humongous bighead--but courageous. Just my thoughts -Hermowninny From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 17:47:24 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:47:24 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84927 bboy_mn wrote: I also think that one Slytherin in > particular will stand out. We have frequently discussed this person, > labeling them "The Good Slytherin", and have speculated that it could > be the mysterious Blaise Zambini. I think we'll also see more of Theodore Nott, whose father was a DE involved in the battle of the DoM--and apparently left to his fate by Lucius Malfoy. ("Leave Nott. Leave him, I say!" OoP 788, Am. ed.) If Theo somehow finds out about Lucius's attitude toward his father, he's not going to be well-disposed toward Draco. (I also want to know why people think that Goyle, Sr., seems to have been absent, but I've posed this query twice and no one has responded.) Carol From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 17:54:48 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:54:48 -0000 Subject: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84928 Carol wrote: > I agree that Mark Evans is important (and distantly related to Harry), Mark is ten years old in OotP Mark's family (who are clearly muggles based on the neighborhood > they live in) has passed out of the consciousness of the WW. Hermowninny now writes: I agree Mark Evans is important--as I just explained to my husband last night--It's not uncommon in the world I live in to find someone on the next block with the same last name as your family, expecially with a common name like Evans. However, we are not talking about my world, we are talking about a world that lives only in JKR's mind (and writing) and she could have named this little boy anything she wanted, and she chose Evans to be his name. I can't imagine her putting this in there for no reason. Either he's related, or it's a red herring. Now what I really wanted to say is this... We know Mark is 10 years old in OOP and we assume he's a muggle (see Carol's comments above). But what if he's not a muggle. What are the chances he will get a Hogwarts letter before book six comes out? The timing is right? -Hermowninny From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 18:04:21 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:04:21 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin. In-Reply-To: <10.3820e7b9.2ce49308@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84929 Tonks said: > I think to prove this point to the readers, Harry will encounter the 'Good > Slytherin' as you noted. It needs to be proven. JKR is not as black and white as > Good House/Bad House. So far, we have only met baddie Slytherins. Yet, we > have really only met four distinctly in Harry's year- I think- Malfoy, Crabbe, > Goyle, and Pansy Parkinson. In Harry's year, alone, that is only four of ten. ( > Ten being what we know of ) Somewhere in there, there must be someone who is > not evil.... I think it's worth noting that when Harry lands safely after riding Buckbeak in Hagrid's combined Gryffindor/Slytherin CoMC class, "everyone except Malfoy, Crabbe, and Goyle cheered" (PoA 117, Am. ed.). That means all the Slytherins except those three, even Pansy Parkinson, cheered for Harry. Also, as I noted earlier, everyone in Hogwarts, even the three bad boys, raised their glasses in a toast to the indisputably good Cedric Diggory: "They did it, all of them; the benches scraped as everyone in the Hall stood, and raised their goblets, and echoed in one loud, low, rumbling voice, 'Cedric Diggory.'" As I read these passages, there is hope for some semblance of unity and for more than one good Slytherin (in addition to Snape). Carol From cindysphynx at comcast.net Thu Nov 13 18:50:40 2003 From: cindysphynx at comcast.net (Cindy C.) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:50:40 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84930 Hi! I'm jumping in here a little late, but hopefully not too late . . . Alshain wrote: > Yes, there are male archetypes in the stories as well. Yes, some of > them never develops. Yes, Draco seems to be frozen in his role as > nemesis. That's the point. > Male character with zero development = boring male character. > Female character with zero development = boring female character. > More female characters with zero development = more boring female > characters. > > I'm choosing to believe that JKR does this deliberately, Interesting points, Alshain. Me? I'm torn on what I think about gender issues in HP post-OoP. Before OoP, I was not at all a fan of the way the women characters were developed. It seemed that they were cardboard figures. They didn't move. They didn't do much. They were almost like props. That certainly changed in OoP, but some female characters (chiefly Molly) went from being a bit stiff and underdeveloped to being . . . well, space aliens. Molly in particular went from a character that was internally consistent and made sense to being just plain *weird.* Tidying the place up while war preparation goes on all around her. Stuck in a time warp and unable to grow with her children. What I can't figure out is if JKR did this to Molly on purpose or even for a reason. Cindy -- hoping she hasn't offended From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Nov 13 18:55:53 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:55:53 -0000 Subject: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84931 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > As for the Evanses, it's unclear to me why they would have been killed > at all. Voldemort hesitated to kill Lily. He had no reason whatever to > kill her parents, or to seek them out in the muggle world. > > Carol It doesn't have to be Voldemort. Maybe it were the Death Eaters, who hated Muggles and also had a reason to "teach the Mudblood a lesson". Maybe James and Lily were the intended victims, and the Evanses just happened to be there. Anyway, Sirius said in GoF, that many muggles died during the first Voldiewar. I wouldn't be surprised if Mr and Mrs Evans were among them. Hickengruendler From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 13 19:50:01 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 19:50:01 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84932 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cindy C." wrote: > Molly in particular went from a character that > was internally consistent and made sense to being just plain > *weird.* Tidying the place up while war preparation goes on all > around her. Stuck in a time warp and unable to grow with her > children. Siriusly Snapey Susan here: Well, Cindy, you didn't offend me, but I do feel I need to respond to this. This is a house which has been CLOSED UP for 10 years, with Kreacher apparently doing nothing towards its maintenance, cleaning or upkeep. This will be headquarters for the Order and--by extension, since both senior Weasleys are members of the Order--home to all of the Weasley family & its "offshoots" [read: Harry & Hermione]. As such, 12 Grimmauld Place needs to be livable. TEN YEARS of dust, filth and, apparently, magical beasties run amok, means a lot of work to make the place liveable! Besides that, if 1) you are Molly = Mum of 7 = an adult lifetime of housekeeping; and if 2) you are stuck at HQ at those times when you're not off pulling guard duty; and if 3) you are scared to death that one or more of your brood or "offshoots" [which includes the key target, after all] is going to be murdered, then I think it is understandable that one might feel the need to put a helluva lot of energy into SOMETHING. Bashing tapestries and beating carpets and de- moxying [or whatever they were--book not w/ me] can go a long way towards filling time, using up energy, and keeping one's mind off of contemplating those awful potential happenings. In short, I don't think Molly acted weird at all. I'm a mom of two, and I understand both the protectiveness and the desire to stay BUSY when worried. Hmmmm. Maybe I'm just weird, too. Siriusly Snapey Susan From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 20:12:14 2003 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:12:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031113201214.49812.qmail@web20011.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84933 --- "Cindy C." wrote: > That certainly changed in OoP, but some female > characters (chiefly > Molly) went from being a bit stiff and > underdeveloped to being . . . > well, space aliens. Molly in particular went from a > character that > was internally consistent and made sense to being > just plain *weird.* > Tidying the place up while war preparation goes on > all around her. > Stuck in a time warp and unable to grow with her > children. What I > can't figure out is if JKR did this to Molly on > purpose or even for a > reason. I disagree with your view of Molly. She had no trouble with Charlie or Bill being involved (she was scared for them, but she didn't try to keep them out of anything). Only with the kids that were still "kids." Fred and George were technically of age, but they were still in school. I don't know about in the UK, but here most 18 year old seniors have the same rules they had when they were 17 year old seniors. And they place *needed* to be cleaned. For safety reasons, and to get rid of any "spying" objects and just to be livable. Rebecca who didn't find pre-OOTP McGonagall any more two-dimensional than pre-OOTP Dumbledore ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Nov 13 20:19:39 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 20:19:39 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE46264D@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84934 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonya Minton" wrote: > What if Percy was always on the dark side and HE KNEW what > Scabbers/Peter REALLY was and and Part of the big plan was to give/plant > him to/on Ron so that Peter would be in place to keep an eye on Harry > and wait for a chance to serve up Harry on a platter to He who must not > be named. Jen R.: I don't know if it's been theorized before, but since I'm a Spy! Percy theorist, I have to defend his honor ;). Two problems. One is that Percy couldn't know that Ron and Harry would be friends, or that Harry would be a Gryffindor, so that part of the equation isn't *certain* to work. The other is just my opinion re: Pettigrew. I still don't believe that he was "keeping an ear out for news...Just in case {Voldemort} regained strength and it was safe to rejoin him..." as Sirius explains in POA (chap. 19, p. 370). I think he was content to live as Wormtail, knowing he had no other option, until he is "outed" by Sirius/Remus in the Shrieking Shack. After that, he only has one option--rejoin Voldemort. I suppose he could continue living as Wormtail, but he'd no longer be safe as he was with the Weasleys, specifically Ron. I think his motive when he 'killed' himself was for protection. Why else would he choose the Weasleys to live with, the consummate Gryffindor family? If he was truly waiting around for Voldemort to re-appear, wouldn't he be more likely to choose a family of DE's, so he would get news? He has no way of knowing Ron and Harry would hook up later, that both would be in Gryffindor. He's saving his own skin, not waiting to deliver the "last Potter" to LV. From mail at chartfield.net Thu Nov 13 20:27:44 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 20:27:44 -0000 Subject: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84935 smaragdina5 wrote: >I just read a theory (on mugglenet.com editorial) that Lily and Petunia's parents were SQUIBS. That covers all the bases. I suppose we will find out! Now for Astrofiammante's pet theory about Lily Evans' parents (settle down comfortably). I have spent hours trying to work out how Lily Evans could be technically muggle-born but still related to wizards, in order either to tie Harry and Lily to Voldemort or to relate Lily Evans and that elusive creature Perseus Evans (who I do not believe for one minute is accidental, although I agree he might be a red herring). I do think it is very important that Lily is more or less muggle-born because to 'redeem' her from any supposed impurity of blood and to upset the balance that sees each of the three Trio members as pure- blood, halfblood and muggle-born seems to be to be utterly against the spirit of the books. And I believe JKR has confirmed more than once that she was not from a wizarding family Squibs or a muggle/squib relationship do seem possibilities. In my personal musings, this muggleish parent with wizarding links is labelled "Squib Evans". Now we need a suitable candidate for Squib Evans. Has any squib relative of any wizarding family ever been casually mentioned in passing? Why yes, near the beginning of CoS, when Ron mentions that cousin/second cousin (apologies for not being able to remember which) of Molly Weasley's who no-one ever talks about, who became an accountant. And we know Molly is from one of the Pureblood families, but we have no clue which one. Molly Black? Molly Malfoy? Even Molly Potter? The possibilities are endless. We're also short on descriptions of colouring for Molly - read the "red-headed Weasley" descriptions and you'll see they never definitively either refer to her or omit her. Not accidental, I don't think. The question "What is Molly's maiden name" would be close to the top of my personal list to put to JKR. How about Molly's accountant cousin/second cousin for Squib Evans, father (to preserve the surname) of Lily and Petunia Evans? A relationship which Molly is perfectly clear about, because she is so possessive over Harry, especially with Sirius? Why, you will ask, is Harry not then living with Molly and still benefiting from the blood magic that Petunia can offer? Because being cousin/second cousin to Harry's grandfather (cousin/second cousin twice removed to Harry?) is a pretty tenuous relationship, and nothing like so good as being his aunt, in blood magic terms. And not one of us believes that we know the whole story about Petunia and that spell anyway. (In the pre-OotP frenzy, I was so busy trying to come up with a General and Unifying Theory of Everything that I had Narcissa Malfoy tied into this. I had spotted that she was Someone but unfortunately the wrong Someone - Narcissa Evans. How desperate were we then? But it sat so well next to Lily and Petunia.) Can anyone think of any more squibs left casually lying about? I also think we get some pretty detailed information about Arthur's family in OotP's "The Ancient and Noble House of Black," but that's a whole different post... I'm pretty sure that when we know How They Are Related, we will know the whole thing. And one last tip. If little, victimised Mark Evans ever does turn up at Hogwarts (which I am pretty sceptical about, but maybe slightly less sceptical than I used to be) I predict the expression on old Severus Snape's face at that first school feast might be quite revealing. Astrofiammante From nibleswik at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 19:15:07 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 19:15:07 -0000 Subject: Does the sorting hat sort? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84936 Cheekyweebisom >>the Hat itself is a Slytherin -- very cunning. Carol: > Didn't the hat originally belong to Godric Gryffindor? Me: Yes, I think so. I was joking. I was just saying it was cunning, because my theory about what it says to students is that it's being indirect and manipulative, though not in a bad way, saying things that will elicit one of two responses and in doing so, reveal the students' choices. It's comments to Harry about Slytherin are the basis for why I think that. Cheekyweebisom From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 19:20:06 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 19:20:06 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84937 Chiara wrote: > So if we accept the theory that "only living relative" might be referring to > the moment Harry is made an orphan, Mark is still to come into play, his > father might have conceived him and then died for whatever reason, and his > mother might have died in the intervening years. > > Any thoughts? > > Chiara I don't think Mark's father (who had to be alive at the time Harry went to the Dursley's) was Petunia's brother or Dumbledore could not have considered Petunia to be Harry's only living relative. His blood would have been as suitable as Petunia's for the charm that protects Harry as long as he's in a blood relative's home. The relationship, as I said in a previous post, has to be sufficiently distant for DD to be unaware of it, and that branch of the Evans family has to have been nonmagical for several generations for DD to be unaware of it. I think it's more likely that Mark's father is Lily and Petunia's cousin than their brother, which would make Mark and Harry second cousins. (I also think that Mark, like Harry at age ten, has no idea that he's a wizard or he wouldn't let Dudley and his gang beat him up. Enter the owl with a letter from Hogwarts. . . .) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 19:39:08 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 19:39:08 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE46264D@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84938 -Tonya Mintonwrote: > Ok here is another theory.....(or course someone probably already came > up with it, but it is new to me!! I hope that is ok!!) > > What if Percy was always on the dark side and HE KNEW what > Scabbers/Peter REALLY was and and Part of the big plan was to give/plant > him to/on Ron so that Peter would be in place to keep an eye on Harry > and wait for a chance to serve up Harry on a platter to He who must not > be named. > > I just don't have one of those evil calculating, manipulative minds so > go easy one me!! What do you think?? Possible?? If we have already > been through this one could you point me to the correct posts?? Thanks > I couldn't find them!! > > Tonya > ESE!Percy? The Sorting Hat placed him in Gryffindor so I think at some point he'll show courage--we haven't seen it yet--but I also think the twins have him all sized up: BigHead Boy (not to mention "prat" and "git"). I don't know how he came by Scabbers, who may have sensed some weakness in him, but I think he's more like Quirrell (vain, ambitious, and gullible) than like, say, Dolohov, who seems altogether evil. Poor Percy! I'm sure that boy is headed for serious trouble, and it may well be that HIS head is served up on a silver platter to Voldemort as a way of destroying the Weasley family from within. The hand labeled "Percy" on the Weasleys' clock moves toward "mortal peril" as his mother watches frozen with horror. . . . So, no, I don't think Percy is evil, only deluded, and he will cause his family grief, mark my word. (Maybe Penelope Clearwater will bring him around before it's too late?) Carol From evil_sushi2003 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 13 19:48:45 2003 From: evil_sushi2003 at hotmail.com (evil_sushi2003) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 19:48:45 -0000 Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said and Character Traits of the Different House In-Reply-To: <10.3820e7b9.2ce49308@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84939 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, > Steve wrote:> > > Notice that it is HARRY who brings up Slytherin, not the Sorting > Hat. As you will see as the quote continues, the Sorting Hat > merely > interogates him as to 'why not Slytherin'. My observations on > the > Sorting Hat's observation. The very first thing > that catches the 'eye' of the Sorting Hat is 'plenty of > courage'. > > > > Berit replied: > > So it's logical to deduce that the Hat might in > > fact have placed Harry in Gryffindor anyway. But notice also the > Hat's reaction when it discovers Harry's "thirst to prove > himself" ES I have always thought that people were sorted into different houses by what they believed was the stringest trait. ie, one person may thnk that it is best to be ambitious, or brave, clever, kind. The fact is (she says unbiasedly) that they are all probably of equal value... So if a person thought that bravery was the best posible character trait, then they would presumably try to be brave, and wish they were brave, and in the outcome, probably would become brave. So if the houses represent a selection of traits, IMO, they are almost the same traits, but of different worth (OMG thats confusing... erm...) Say the traits that they represent (mainly) bravery, kindness, ambition and intellect. IMO all the houses encompass all of the traits, but gryffindors are the people who believe that bravery is most important. And also, for instance, honour; Both Draco(family honour)and Harry have this trait; so they are all interlinked. But I always just think that each house approaches them from a different angle. Also if you see it from a teaching viewpoint: ambitious people tend to be quite competitive (basically speaking), so if you place lots of ambitious peolpe together (working, living in dormitories, etc) then they are more likely to enjoy the competition. Intellectual people prefer a more quiet, disscussive learning atmosphere, so if they are grouped together, then it would be more challenging for them. But if a competitive person is placed with a quiet, shy person, then neither will benefit as much educationly, bullying may be more likely, and they would probably not have a lot in common, so the friendship wouldn't be very strong. ES From seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk Thu Nov 13 19:21:39 2003 From: seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk (seraphina_snape) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 19:21:39 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! (Is Percy evil?) In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE46264D@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84940 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonya Minton" wrote: > Ok here is another theory.....(or course someone probably already came > up with it, but it is new to me!! I hope that is ok!!) > > What if Percy was always on the dark side and HE KNEW what > Scabbers/Peter REALLY was and and Part of the big plan was to give/plant > him to/on Ron so that Peter would be in place to keep an eye on Harry > and wait for a chance to serve up Harry on a platter to He who must not > be named. > sera says: I'm not sure if Percy really is evil. To me, it always seemed as if he tried to do the right thing (but just can't see it from his position). His parents are poor and not well-respected by many richer wizarding families, and he turns away from them because they keep him from following his ambitions, i.e. become a well-respected and 'worthy' member of society. He is always overshadowed by his parents and his brothers, everyone recognizes him as a Weasley immediately. He simply tries to be someone who's not "just a Weasley" but himself (but he doesn't know who he is yet). He was always an outcast, even in his own family (just look how the twins treat him - okay, he is annoying and a show-off, but they are family - we don't know of a scene where the twins were ever nice to Percy, do we?). So after finishing school, he starts to work. And he keeps doing what he always did: Follow orders. He always followed the rules, always did what the teachers told him. And now he does what Crouch, or whoever he's working for, wants him to do. He clearly believes in authority. Authorities are always right - so he does what they tell him to do. From his point of view, it's the 'right' thing. And it will bring him nearer to his goal - become 'someone', get promoted, etc. So I don't think Percy is evil. He may do the wrong things, and help the wrong people, but does it all out of good faith. He doesn't know any better. sera PS: I only read OotP twice, and I didn't pay that much attention to Percy, so if I'm hugely mistaken, correct me, please. From nibleswik at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 20:26:50 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 20:26:50 -0000 Subject: SHIP: Hermione, Ginny and Luna Oh my! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84941 > In my opinion, the Tonks camp isn't dealing well with the fact >that Tonks really IS that much older than Harry. Frankly, >up until the age of 21 to 28, most young people change a great >deal. Anyway, for a Harry-Tonks ship to work, Tonks will >have to remain available until Harry is at least 21, possibly older > . This means Tonks will be at least 28, and perhaps well > into her 30's before settling into something serious with Harry. > I have a hard time believing this practical, even from an >epilogue's perspective. Me: Okay, I'm in the Tonks camp, so the following is an H/T shipper's justification. I snipped your explanation of how old Tonks must be because I agree with it -- I see her as about 10 years older than him. First of all, I agree with you that any long-term Harry/Tonks relationship is between 5 and 10 years in coming. So what? Harry can have relationships with Ginny, Luna, and *cringe* maybe even Hermione in that time. Or he can be The Hero, busy being lonely because he has to be. Tonks can do her thing. I just think they'll eventually come back to each other. It makes sense. >From what we know about Tonks, she and Harry are quite similar in their interests. He wants to be an Auror. They like each other. Not only do they like each other as friends, but I think they have the potential for romance. So if the only problem with Tonks is age (and that is the only problem you brought up), I think the relationship is still possible. He hasn't known her as long as Hermione, so there won't be any "incest" issues, and he has more in common with her than he does Ginny. As for Luna, I just don't see sparks there. Richard: > With regard to Hermione, I have a serious problem with the Ron- > Hermione match-up. First off, JKR has a penchant for >laying so many trails that picking the right one becomes a matter > more of guesswork than of logic and deduction. But, there > is a more basic reason for not thinking this a good match. > Ron and Hermione are too often at opposite poles of interest, >beliefs and values, and both have almost routinely expressed >impatience with, and even contempt for, the others views. Me: I agree with everything you said there. I believe that there has to be a Ron/Hermione relationship before the series' end, but that it won't work. They really do have absolutely nothing in common. Someone else noted that a "practical" side to R/H -- Hermione would then be part of the Weasley clan -- had the downfall of suggesting that she wasn't already. Or maybe that person said the same about Harry/Ginny. In any case, I think it applies to Hermione. She doesn't need to marry Ron in order to fit in. And I really don't think something JKR's been setting up as obvious for so long is going to turn out the obvious way. Richard: > The Ginny-Harry match has some real charm to it. Ginny is growing > as a person, with real strength and independence. Yet, it is a >little on the "pat" side, and suffers from the fact that Harry is >now effectively a Weasley. With a few more years there could well > be the same kind of problem with a feeling of "incestuousness" >that the H/H match must conquer. Me: Harry/Ginny is my second ship choice for Harry. I don't think they would encounter the "incest" problem, because, yes, Harry is a part of that family, but I see the family itself being at once very unified and in clusters. The Weasley unity made Percy's twisted rebellion all the worse -- breaking away from a family like the Malfoys would ruin your name (at least in purebloods' eyes), but at least they aren't one big happy family. Breaking away from the Weasleys seems treasonous in the extreme. As for the clusters, though, Fred and George are a family unto their own, for example. Ron, Ginny, and Harry sort of fit in with them; Bill and Charlie don't really. Percy never did, not even a little. These clusters have allowed Harry to be part of the Weasley family while still not getting to know Ginny very well. Hence, I think H/G is still viable. Richard: > Luna is a late comer, and we really don't know that much about >her. Harry certainly thinks her odd, but has real sympathy and >respect for her. I don't see that we have much else than this to >base a strong SHIP thesis on, but isn't that like much of life? Who > knows why we fall in love with any one person, and not with >another? Me: As you've pointed out, we know very little about Harry and Luna, and so don't know how they'd be together. Your choice of words, though, I think betrays the lack of anything we have with which to build Luna-relationships. You say, "I don't see that we have much else than this to base a strong SHIP thesis on". I would prefer, "I don't see that we have much else than this to base a SHIP thesis on". It may seem like nitpicking, but the thing is, I don't see any possible way to build a /strong/ SHIP thesis. I think /any/ thesis at all is very iffy with H/L. That's why I'm going on my instincts with this one. My instincts point very strongly to "no chemistry at all". Sure, he doesn't have the "incest" problem with her, but I don't think he has much of anything with Luna except the potential for a strong, lasting friendship. Going solely on my instincts, I think the Luna- ship that makes sense is Ron/Luna. I felt more tension between them, and Ron is a wacky sort of normal, a kind of normal that goes best with the totally abnormal, which Luna certainly is. They both fit really well in their houses, in my opinion, but neither fit in conventional ways. Ron has a quiet sort of bravery, Luna a bizarre intelligence that is probably more aptly labeled "wisdom". I can see Ron and Luna making sense, but I can't see that for Luna and Harry. Cheekyweebisom, who thinks Hermione's more similar to Draco than to any other principal character From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Nov 13 20:32:18 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 20:32:18 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84942 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonya Minton" > wrote: > > > What if Percy was always on the dark side and HE KNEW what > > Scabbers/Peter REALLY was and and Part of the big plan was to > give/plant > > him to/on Ron so that Peter would be in place to keep an eye on > Harry > > and wait for a chance to serve up Harry on a platter to He who > must not > > be named. > > > Jen R.: > > I don't know if it's been theorized before, but since I'm a Spy! > Percy theorist, I have to defend his honor ;). > > Two problems. One is that Percy couldn't know that Ron and Harry > would be friends, or that Harry would be a Gryffindor, so that part > of the equation isn't *certain* to work. > > The other is just my opinion re: Pettigrew. I still don't believe > that he was "keeping an ear out for news... Also, Percy was five when he got Scabbers. And I don't believe a single moment that a five year old child was secretly working for Voldemort. That doesn't make any sense at all. Hickengruendler From mail at chartfield.net Thu Nov 13 20:37:45 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 20:37:45 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84943 Carol wrote: >I also think that Mark, like Harry at age ten, has no idea that he's a wizard or he wouldn't let Dudley and his gang beat him up. Enter the owl with a letter from Hogwarts Now Astrofiammante: I'm really, really sorry to come along with my sceptical attitude to poor little Mark Evans and pour cold water on his head. All I can say in my own defence is that, after reading this thread, I'm a little bit less sceptical than I used to be. I used to think he was an out-and-out flint. Now I think I had overlooked the significance of his being aged ten an there is a slight possibility he is an important future character. But to get back to the point, Carol, if little Mark was a latent wizard, and rotten Dudders and his gang came along and beat him up, wouldn't some latent magic have revealed itself? Wouldn't Mark, as Harry once did, unconsciously defend himself against Dudley and send him packing? Ah, Astrofiammante, you will say, but Harry is a special case in the wizarding world. True. Unarguable really. But Hagrid mentions the phemomenon of latent wizardry in PS as if it was nothing out of the ordinary, and in OotP Dumbledore makes that remark about even the best wizards losing their temper occasionally. A few thoughts for you, anyway Astrofiammante From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Thu Nov 13 20:38:40 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:38:40 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slythe... Message-ID: <49.362e7264.2ce545d0@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84944 Hello bboy_mn at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? Certainly if you are cunning and ambitious, and driven ? to succeed, you meet enough of the qualifications to ? be sorted into Slytherin house. The sorting seems to ? be based on personality characteristics. I can't see the ? Sorting Hat carrying Mr. Slytherin preference for pure ? blood a thousand years into the future, not when it also ? has the combined characteristics of the other three ? founders in it. But, do we really know this for sure? There is so much House speculation right now. Do we really know? And, when I mentioned the names we know so far, I shoudl have been more clear. I meant the people we know. Sorry for the confusion. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tminton at deckerjones.com Thu Nov 13 20:43:22 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:43:22 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE462659@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84945 Jen R.: I don't know if it's been theorized before, but since I'm a Spy! Percy theorist, I have to defend his honor ;). Two problems. One is that Percy couldn't know that Ron and Harry would be friends, or that Harry would be a Gryffindor, so that part of the equation isn't *certain* to work. The other is just my opinion re: Pettigrew. I still don't believe that he was "keeping an ear out for news...Just in case {Voldemort} regained strength and it was safe to rejoin him..." as Sirius explains in POA (chap. 19, p. 370). I think he was content to live as Wormtail, knowing he had no other option, until he is "outed" by Sirius/Remus in the Shrieking Shack. After that, he only has one option--rejoin Voldemort. I suppose he could continue living as Wormtail, but he'd no longer be safe as he was with the Weasleys, specifically Ron. I think his motive when he 'killed' himself was for protection. Why else would he choose the Weasleys to live with, the consummate Gryffindor family? If he was truly waiting around for Voldemort to re-appear, wouldn't he be more likely to choose a family of DE's, so he would get news? He has no way of knowing Ron and Harry would hook up later, that both would be in Gryffindor. He's saving his own skin, not waiting to deliver the "last Potter" to LV. ****************************************************************** Now Tonya: These are very good points!! I wonder if Percy is just thick. In POA he doesn't believe Ron when he says that Black was standing over him with a knife, then in OOP he is such a sleaze bag to his parents. Then he writes that horrible letter to Ron. I am stumped on him!! Tonya [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tminton at deckerjones.com Thu Nov 13 20:45:24 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:45:24 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE46265A@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84946 Carol said: ESE!Percy? The Sorting Hat placed him in Gryffindor so I think at some point he'll show courage--we haven't seen it yet--but I also think the twins have him all sized up: BigHead Boy (not to mention "prat" and "git"). I don't know how he came by Scabbers, who may have sensed some weakness in him, but I think he's more like Quirrell (vain, ambitious, and gullible) than like, say, Dolohov, who seems altogether evil. Poor Percy! I'm sure that boy is headed for serious trouble, and it may well be that HIS head is served up on a silver platter to Voldemort as a way of destroying the Weasley family from within. The hand labeled "Percy" on the Weasleys' clock moves toward "mortal peril" as his mother watches frozen with horror. . . . So, no, I don't think Percy is evil, only deluded, and he will cause his family grief, mark my word. (Maybe Penelope Clearwater will bring him around before it's too late?) Now Tonya: Carol Carol I think you are right Deluded is a great word for him!! I wonder if he is still with Penelope?? I don't remember us hearing aobut her in OOP. Tonya [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tminton at deckerjones.com Thu Nov 13 20:49:08 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:49:08 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE46265B@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84947 Hickengruendler said: Also, Percy was five when he got Scabbers. And I don't believe a single moment that a five year old child was secretly working for Voldemort. That doesn't make any sense at all. Hickengruendler Now Tonya: I missed that part of him being 5 when he got Scabbers. I would have to agree with you that he could not be working vor Voldie at 5 years old!! Altough I bet Umbridge was a horrible child, the toad!! Tonya (who is now convinced that Percy isn't working for the dark side!! Thanks) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mail at chartfield.net Thu Nov 13 21:07:45 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 21:07:45 -0000 Subject: Riddle Senior In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84948 LIWY wrote: > I've been thinking a lot recently about just what Tom Riddle, Senior was like personally I don't have GoF handy and so can't give you an exact quote. But I'm afraid I think there's a pretty damning description of him given there in one of only two 'objectively-written' chapters to exist in the whole series. It says something along the lines of the Little Hangleton villagers disliking the senior Riddles for being rude and their son, who was even ruder, even more. Apologies again for the inexact quote Astrofiammante From mail at chartfield.net Thu Nov 13 21:16:15 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 21:16:15 -0000 Subject: Heir of other houses In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031112193759.00bc79c0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84949 Troels Forchhammer wrote: > The problem is, IMO, that the evidence really is there - we have > some very strong evidence that associates Harry with Gryffindor, > but it can equally well be there to prove that Harry very strongly > represents the Gryffindor virtues and to prove a more direct > connection between Harry and Godric Gryffindor. Harry is strongly > associated with Gryffindor - the question is whether it is 'just' > the house or if it also the founder. IMHO this explains the sword, the sorting hat, the remarks by Dumbledore about choices - everything but Godric's Hollow. That's the one single piece of evidence that makes me think there is more to the old 'heir of Gryffindor' idea than just a fan construct. And I believe we've had a few plummy hints from JKR about its importance... Astrofiammante From kkearney at students.miami.edu Thu Nov 13 21:32:16 2003 From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 21:32:16 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84950 Astrofiammante asked: > But to get back to the point, Carol, if little Mark was a latent > wizard, and rotten Dudders and his gang came along and beat him up, > wouldn't some latent magic have revealed itself? Wouldn't Mark, as > Harry once did, unconsciously defend himself against Dudley and send > him packing? Even Harry wasn't able to defend himself often. He mentions escaping Dudley's gang once by jumping/apparating/what have you onto the school roof, but it is also stated repeatedly that Dudley and his friends love hitting Harry. This would hardly be a fun pastime, and Harry would have no reason to dread it, if unconcious magic always protected him. I'm still not sure what to make of Mark. I think it entirely feasible that Mark's father was too young at the time of Lily's death to take Harry, therefore making Dubledore's comment true if he was only considering relatives capable of caring for a baby (Lily, after all, had only just left Hogwarts). However, if this were true, I would expect Petunia to have at least attempted to pawn Harry off on him since then. I'll keep waiting for a better explanation. -Corinth From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Nov 13 21:35:59 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 21:35:59 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE462659@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84951 Tonya wrote: > These are very good points!! I wonder if Percy is just thick. In POA > he doesn't believe Ron when he says that Black was standing over him > with a knife, then in OOP he is such a sleaze bag to his parents. Then > he writes that horrible letter to Ron. I am stumped on him!! Jen R.: If you want to read some interesting discussion about why Percy acted the way he did in OOTP, there were a couple of threads in Sept.: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80912 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80946 Everything from Spy!Percy, Polyjuice!Percy, to 'Percy's a git'. A few of us got together off-line and tried to come up with one theory, but couldn't agree on which one! So, the TBAY movement died out. Also on this thread, Hickengruendler said: >Percy was five when he got Scabbers. And I don't believe a >single moment that a five year old child was secretly working for >Voldemort. That doesn't make any sense at all. Jen: I would say that's definitive evidence that Percy didn't plant Scabbers on Ron! From tminton at deckerjones.com Thu Nov 13 21:42:37 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:42:37 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE982C@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84952 Jen R. said : If you want to read some interesting discussion about why Percy acted the way he did in OOTP, there were a couple of threads in Sept.: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80912 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/80946 Everything from Spy!Percy, Polyjuice!Percy, to 'Percy's a git'. A few of us got together off-line and tried to come up with one theory, but couldn't agree on which one! So, the TBAY movement died out. Also on this thread, Hickengruendler said: >Percy was five when he got Scabbers. And I don't believe a >single moment that a five year old child was secretly working for >Voldemort. That doesn't make any sense at all. Jen: I would say that's definitive evidence that Percy didn't plant Scabbers on Ron! Now Tonya: Jen, You rock!! Thanks so much for showing me where this discussion is!! Yes I agree the fact that Percy was 5 is definitive!! I will be moving on to a new thought pattern as soon as I am done reading the suggested posts. Tonya (who needs to get out more obliviously) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 21:35:41 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 21:35:41 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84953 > Carol wrote: > > >I also think that Mark, like Harry at age ten, has no idea that he's > a wizard or he wouldn't let Dudley and his gang beat him up. Enter > the owl with a letter from Hogwarts > > Now Astrofiammante: > > I'm really, really sorry to come along with my sceptical attitude to > poor little Mark Evans and pour cold water on his head. > > All I can say in my own defence is that, after reading this thread, > I'm a little bit less sceptical than I used to be. > > I used to think he was an out-and-out flint. Now I think I had > overlooked the significance of his being aged ten an there is a > slight possibility he is an important future character. Carol: I think his name was very carefully planted, much like the reference to Sirius Black and his motorcycle in SS/PS chapter one or the references to Cedric Diggory in PoA. JKR could have left the ten-year-old unnamed if her only intention was to show what a thug fifteen-year-old Dudley had become. Or he could be Mark Brown, age nine. But Mark Evans? Age ten? It can't be a coincidence. It has to be a clue. Astrofiamante again: > But to get back to the point, Carol, if little Mark was a latent > wizard, and rotten Dudders and his gang came along and beat him up, > wouldn't some latent magic have revealed itself? Wouldn't Mark, as > Harry once did, unconsciously defend himself against Dudley and send > him packing? > I thought about that, too. I think he doesn't know about his own powers, rather like Neville, and being confronted by a gang of fifteen-year-olds is almost completely helpless. All I can say is that he's in OoP for a reason, and I very much doubt he's a flint. (Wonder if Petunia knows about him? Hm.) Carol From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Thu Nov 13 21:59:07 2003 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 16:59:07 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! Message-ID: <08E839D5.526FDAD2.4B073798@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84954 >>Hickengruendler: >>Also, Percy was five when he got Scabbers. And I don't >>believe a single moment that a five year old child was >>secretly working for Voldemort. That doesn't make any >>sense at all. Oryomai: Are we sure that Vapor!Mort went straight to Albania? Maybe he made a stop at the Burrow and gave young Percy the idea to keep the rat. I don't like the coincidence of Scabbers!Peter just happening to be in the Weasley family... Oryomai --Who knows that what she just said is probably not true, but just wanted to throw it in. From tminton at deckerjones.com Thu Nov 13 22:02:38 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 16:02:38 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE46265D@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84955 Oryomai: Are we sure that Vapor!Mort went straight to Albania? Maybe he made a stop at the Burrow and gave young Percy the idea to keep the rat. I don't like the coincidence of Scabbers!Peter just happening to be in the Weasley family... Oryomai --Who knows that what she just said is probably not true, but just wanted to throw it in. Tonya: If Voldie can put into Harry dreams of MOM then why couldn't he put into Percy the need to keep Scabbers.......... Maybe that is reason why Percy is thick sometimes. I think it might be possible. Tonya [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Nov 13 22:13:06 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:13:06 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE46265B@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84956 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tonya Minton" wrote: > > Now Tonya: > > I missed that part of him being 5 when he got Scabbers. I would have to > agree with you that he could not be working vor Voldie at 5 years old!! It was mentioned in PoA. Ron said, that they had Scabbers for 12 years. Percy was in 7th year in PoA, which makes him 17 or maybe 18. That menas he was 5 or 6 12 years ago, when they got Scabbers. Hickengruendler From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 21:53:53 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 21:53:53 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE462659@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84957 Jen R. Wrote: Pettigrew. I still don't believe > that he was "keeping an ear out for news...Just in case {Voldemort} > regained strength and it was safe to rejoin him..." as Sirius > explains in POA (chap. 19, p. 370). I think he was content to live > as Wormtail, knowing he had no other option, until he is "outed" by > Sirius/Remus in the Shrieking Shack. After that, he only has one > option--rejoin Voldemort. I suppose he could continue living as > Wormtail, but he'd no longer be safe as he was with the Weasleys, > specifically Ron. Carol: I agree with you. Scabbers was basically lazy and slept a lot. Peter seems to have been the same way, not taking action unless he had no choice. (Can't back this up with specific examples at the moment but I know it was mentioned several times.) > > > Now Tonya: > > These are very good points!! I wonder if Percy is just thick. In POA > he doesn't believe Ron when he says that Black was standing over him > with a knife, then in OOP he is such a sleaze bag to his parents. Then > he writes that horrible letter to Ron. I am stumped on him!! > > Tonya Percy is book smart like Hermione (twelve O.W.L.S. or something like that), but also ambitious and headstrong. I agree that he thinks he's right in respecting authority and following rules (like Hermione in SS/PS) and the early books treat him as a pathetically comic figure. (I laughed out loud when Fred addressed him as Weatherby early in GoF.) Now we see him heading for trouble, first idolizing Barty Crouch, Sr., then going along with Fudge, almost as if he's defiantly heading for a fall just to spite his family, even the mother who loves him and was so proud of him. It's possible that he's under an Imperius curse, having no doubt encountered our dear friend Lucius Malfoy in the MoM a number of times, but I think he's just reaping what he sowed. I like Percy and feel sorry for him, but I'm even sorrier for Molly. I can't get the scene where he returns his sweater, followed so closely by Molly's boggart, out of my mind. Willingly or unwillingly, I think Percy is being manipulated. Maybe there's a chance for him to come back to his family with Lucius in prison, but probably the damage is already done. I think Percy is going to die. It would be the ultimate irony if it was Scabbers/Pettigrew who killed him. Carol From brookehildebrand at hotmail.com Thu Nov 13 22:28:14 2003 From: brookehildebrand at hotmail.com (Brooke) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:28:14 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84958 I agree with many of the other posts replying to this subject. It is about time that we were introduced to a Slytherin with some moral fiber. Certainly they can't all be like Malfoy & his disciples. I thought that perhaps it was the boy Harry noticed in OoP who had also seen a thestral. When Hagrid took his class to the Forbidden Forest to introduce them to thestrals, Harry, Luna, and one other boy who Harry thought was a Slytherin held up their hands when Hagrid asked who could see them. I realize that the fact that this kid can see a thestral gives us no indication that he's a "good" slytherin, but I remember getting the distinct feeling when I first read that part, that JKR had dropped a very subtle clue by including that seemingly dismissable incident. Any thoughts? From belijako at online.no Thu Nov 13 22:30:46 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:30:46 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84959 Astrofiammante wrote: > But to get back to the point, Carol, if little Mark was a latent > wizard, and rotten Dudders and his gang came along and beat him up, > wouldn't some latent magic have revealed itself? Wouldn't Mark, as > Harry once did, unconsciously defend himself against Dudley and send him packing? Me: Others has already commented on the fact that not even Harry defended himself magically every time he was cornered by Dudley and his gang; Harry was beat up quite frequently. I guess it's no different with Mark if he is a wizard. But what caught my eye in OoP, is that there is actually a description of Mark's "personality", however short! Rowling gives us his name, his age, AND in Dudley's words she tells us that Mark was "asking for it", and that he is "cheeky"! I don't think Dudley is lying; I think he is describing a boy very much alike another boy I know about who doesn't take Dudley's bullying lying down! Yep, personality-wise I believe Mark and Harry has something in common... :-) Berit From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 13 23:07:06 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:07:06 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84960 <<<--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: ...Voldemort stereotypes everybody - including himself. I mean, a totally black outfit; white face and red eyes? And a pet snake? Where's his style? Any self respecting villain should at least invest in a good tailor, for heavens sake...>>> The Sergeant Majorette (who gave up contacts except as fashion accessory when she found she kept smacking herself in the head pushing up non-existent glasses) says There, there, give The Dark Lord Tommy Marvel a break. We all went through that business of inventing new identities by anagram. Of course, most of us did outgrow it with puberty. A tailor, a stylist, a cosmetic surgery consultant and a speechwriter. Queer Eye for the Unmentionable Guy... I'm telling you, Voldemort is a monkey. It's Lucius Malfoy that's grinding the organ. --JDR From mail at chartfield.net Thu Nov 13 23:11:42 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:11:42 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84961 Berit said: >Others has already commented on the fact that not even Harry defended himself magically every time he was cornered by Dudley and his gang; Harry was beat up quite frequently. Now me: It does occur to me that Harry, having the misfortune to live with Dudley, would be on the sharp end of much more of his bullying than anyone else, to the extent that it was routine for him and had been all his life. We know nothing of Mark Evans or his domestic circumstances, so we cannot say whether he is leading a happy or an unhappy life. But I would hope that the experience of being set upon by a number of large 15-year-olds and beaten up would be an unusual one, an extreme situation. Perhaps a time to employ any means at his disposal to escape their attention... I am very uneasy with this, because for my taste it is venturing way too far into the realms of speculation about a boy who gets barely a sentence or two and may never reappear. But I am suggesting that Dudley's bullying was nothing out of the ordinary for Harry, and so might be less likely to provoke an instinctive 'desperate measures' response, while Mark Evans would hopefully see it from a different perspective - it should be more of an extreme event for him, and more likely to trigger magic should he be capable of it. I'm not sure I'd like to push this argument too far, but it is one way of dealing with the very valid point you have raised: why did Harry not employ latent magic as a defence against Dudley more often? A possible answer: because he was too accustomed to the bullying. Another possible answer: because the latent magic was not routinely available to him and would not necessarily be to anyone else in a similar situation. Take your pick (in fact, I think you have already). Back to Berit: > [JKR] tells us that Mark was "asking for it", and that he is "cheeky"! I don't think Dudley is lying; I think he is describing a boy very much alike another boy I know about who doesn't take Dudley's bullying lying down! Yep, personality-wise I believe Mark and Harry has something in common... :-) I take this rather as a mirror of Dudley's personality than any reflection on Mark Evans - he reads the response he wants in the boy's reaction, the one that allows him to initiate violence. I'm afraid I think you might be extrapolating a bit too much from just three words. But hey, where would this list be otherwise? With all good wishes Astrofiammante From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 23:41:38 2003 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:41:38 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans -- Pattern of clues and context -- More? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84962 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > I think > it's more likely that Mark's father is Lily and Petunia's cousin than > their brother, which would make Mark and Harry second cousins. (I also > think that Mark, like Harry at age ten, has no idea that he's a wizard > or he wouldn't let Dudley and his gang beat him up. Enter the owl with > a letter from Hogwarts. . . .) > Carol And the pattern of the prose is right. As mentioned in another post, we get a description of Mark Evans, his whole name, and his "cheeky" personality. That's a lot for a throwaway character. It's also telling that we with a HP-OCD problem have one more piece of evidence than the benighted Muggle-tudes out there. JKR said in an interview a while back that Lily's maiden name was Evans. In canon, this isn't mentioned until the Snape-Pensieve scene, when James is writing L.E. and then refers to Lily as "Evans." This is the same pattern that JKR uses often in her books, dropping in a couple words and laying in the context later, such as (another post on this thread also mentioned) Hargrid riding *Sirius Black's* motorcycle, and then *2 books later* we find out that SB was at Harry's house when L and J were killed and may have been the murderer. Or that rat (Scabbers) running around for two and a half books before he un-animagus-es. And in PS/SS, McGonagall the animagus is introduced in the first chapter, just before SB's hog, thus introducing the concept. Or in Dumbledore's Penseive in GoF, the Lestranges and other people being tried by the Wizemagot (or however ya spell that.) This introduced a lot of DE's and the whole trial process, which became important for HP in OotP when he almost got expelled and excommunicated. Or the time-turner introduced in PoA that will doubtlessly be important later in the MoM, Division of Timelords. (Didn't anybody else giggle about the British callbox being the entrance to the MoM?) Or polyjuice potion in CoS that HRH used to infiltrate Slytherin, that in GoF disguised CrouchJr!Moody. (Favorite line from GoF AmPB, p 91, at the Quid Cup: "[Crouch Sr.] spoke as though he wanted to leave nobody in any doubt that all his ancestors had abided strictly by the law." One of his *descendants,* however, was less strict. Hee-hee. Snarky.) What else fits this pattern? There must be more. TK -- Tigerpatronus From belijako at online.no Thu Nov 13 23:54:45 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:54:45 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84963 Astrofiammante wrote: But I would hope that the experience of being set upon by a number of large 15-year-olds and beaten up would be an unusual one, an extreme situation. [JKR] tells us that Mark was "asking for it", and that he > is "cheeky"!> I take this rather as a mirror of Dudley's personality than any reflection on Mark Evans - he reads the response he wants in the boy's reaction, the one that allows him to initiate violence. I'm afraid I think you might be extrapolating a bit too much from just three words. Me: I'll have to disagree a little :-) It's clear from the HP books that all the kids in the neighbourhood of Little Whinging were constantly being harassed by Dudley and his gang. Mark would certainly have bumped into Dudley more than once, so I doubt Dudley and his gang beating him up was an unusual, "extreme situation". And I agree with you that Dudley probably "reads" more into poor Mark's "behaviour" in order to justify whatever he is doing to him. But, that said, I still believe there is some truth in Dudley's words about Mark. Of course I don't believe Mark egged Dudley on on purpose (that only happened in Dudley's head), but I think the ten-year-old is "cheeky" the way Harry always has been with Dudley; not taking the bullying lying down! It's all about "attitude", and I have a feeling Mark Evans has got it, especially if he's related to cheeky Harry :-) I know it's risky to extract so much from just two sentences, but we'll wait and see if there's something to it... Berit From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 18:25:50 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:25:50 -0000 Subject: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84964 I (Carol) wrote: > > In JKR's case, it's self-evident that she's opposed to racism and > > discrimination against people who are different in any way (with the > > possible exception of the giants, who do seem rather subhuman--Hagrid > > and Madame Maxime as half-giants not included). I for one think her > > politics are a little too transparent and that the House Elf business > > comes a bit too close to allegory (it seems too closely patterned on > > American pre-Civil War slavery just as Voldemort is patterned in part > > on Hitler, by JKR's own admission). In any case, we can refute the > > charges of stereotyping simply by looking at the House Elves. Dobby, > > Winky, and Kreacher may all speak like variations of Gollum, but they > > have distinctly different personalities. In fact, the only two > > characters who seem to me to be stereotyped are Crabbe and Goyle, who > > are virtually indistinguishable except for their heights and haircuts, > > and I confess that it would be hard to avoid stereotyping in their > > case. They're intended as "flat," "static" characters in any case, to > > borrow E.M. Forster's terms. Their sole purpose is to bolster Draco in > > his role as bully without having any real identity themselves. > > Kneasy wrote: > Hmm. I wonder if I'm reading you correctly. Or vice versa. > My original complaint was not with any supposed stereotypes perpetrated > by JKR, (I made more or less the same point about the three elves), but > with the stereotypes that some of the posters want to impose on JKR in > order to make her tale *better*. Exactly. My intention was to defend your view that JKR's characters are not stereotypes and that certain readers are imposing their own values on her by reading Molly et al. in that way. She can't possibly satisfy every readers' view of what her book "ought" to be. She has to follow her own vision of the WW and put on paper the characters who live in her head, whether we approve of them or not. > I wrote: I hope this helps to cheer you up. That was my intention, anyway. > Kneasy wrote: > Thanks for the thought, but a couple of beers would be better. Accio beers! Make that butterbeers. :-) Carol From seuferer at netins.net Thu Nov 13 21:46:40 2003 From: seuferer at netins.net (David & Lisa Seuferer) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 15:46:40 -0600 Subject: All evil wizards from Slytherin, was What the Sorting hat really said. In-Reply-To: <1068724291.3501.27024.m12@yahoogroups.com> References: <1068724291.3501.27024.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3FB3FBC0.5070000@netins.net> No: HPFGUIDX 84965 >I also think there will be a revelation that some extremely >significant character will was a Slytherin; possibly Sirius and maybe >James. I think that is one of the reasons why JKR is being vague about >the houses of many of the characters in the book. > Hello! I am new to this list and am so happy to find you discussing one of my favorite subjects. I think, after carefully reading the Humongous Big File, that I am supposed to say a little about myself on my first post? I am a 36 y/o mom of 4 kids. I found Harry Potter when a fellow home-schooling mom sent me an email with a tirade on how evil it was, and what I could do to help ban the books. I figured if this particular extremist group was so upset about it, it must be a pretty good book so I rushed right out and bought it! This was right after the publishing of GoF. I now have all books both in hardback and unabridged audio cassette, and either read and/or listen to them nearly continually. In spite of all this, I am not very good at catching the subtleties of JKR, and spend any spare moment on some HP sites so that I can learn about them, and the speculations that arise from them. If you ever "see" me on one of these other sites, I am invariably "Mrs. Weasley" or "Molly Weasley" as hers is the character I identify with the closest. So, enough? On to my point. On the Harry Potter UK forum that I also visit, there is speculation that when Harry is told that "there's not a witch or wizard who went bad that wasn't in Slytherin", that this was merely an exaggeration, or "figure of speech" so to speak. From Hagrid's view point, they would be an evil lot, but maybe that is not the whole truth of the situation. That perhaps it would have been more accurate to say that "most" or "nearly all" evils came from there. The suggestion is that this was done intentionally by JKR so that the reader would immediately assume Slytherin=bad, Griffindor=good. So that later, of course, she could show how blinding those predjudices can really be. They use Wormtail as an example, and the assumption that James, Remus, Sirius, and Lupin were in the same house. They of course carry this further to the speculative assumption that they were all four in Griffendor, and Wormtail went bad, therefore not EVERY evil wizard can have come out of Slytherin. Also they cite Percy, and his overpowering ambition that may in the future border on evil, yet he was a Griffindor. At any rate, I have been generally intrigued by these theories surrounding the houses, and particularly the Griffindor/Slytherin relationship. I love how JKR is so vague about which house(s) the Marauders were in, as I enjoy the speculation. I really hope we learn more details about their houses before all is over. I will go back to Lurking, and be interested in reading your thoughts and ideas. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tzakis1225 at netzero.com Thu Nov 13 22:59:09 2003 From: tzakis1225 at netzero.com (demetra1225) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:59:09 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE46265D@djmail.deckerjones.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84966 > If Voldie can put into Harry dreams of MOM then why couldn't he put into > Percy the need to keep Scabbers.......... Maybe that is reason why Percy > is thick sometimes. > I think it might be possible. > (snip) > Yes, but I think the explanation given is that Voldemort can put the "visions" into Harry's dreams/mind because of the link they share via the scar after the rebounded AK. So I don't believe that Voldie is playing with Percy's mind. I lean more towards the Percy under the Imperious curse. I think he has been under the Imperious since GoF after Barty,Sr. disappeared. Demetra From seuferer at netins.net Fri Nov 14 00:11:30 2003 From: seuferer at netins.net (David & Lisa Seuferer) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 18:11:30 -0600 Subject: Stereotyping, Molly Weasley, and male/female role models. In-Reply-To: <1068760776.7717.6506.m11@yahoogroups.com> References: <1068760776.7717.6506.m11@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <3FB41DB2.1050207@netins.net> No: HPFGUIDX 84967 Cindy C. wrote: > >Hi! I'm jumping in here a little late, but hopefully not too late > > > >That certainly changed in OoP, but some female characters (chiefly >Molly) went from being a bit stiff and underdeveloped to being . . . >well, space aliens. Molly in particular went from a character that >was internally consistent and made sense to being just plain *weird.* > Tidying the place up while war preparation goes on all around her. >Stuck in a time warp and unable to grow with her children. What I >can't figure out is if JKR did this to Molly on purpose or even for a >reason. > >Cindy -- hoping she hasn't offended > Hi Cindy! I'm very new here, but couldn't resist jumping in here, as Molly is my #1 favorite "secondary" character. I'm not offended, but may I respectfully disagree? I have four kids. To me, taking care of the kids and the house and etc., is what I DO. I am also college educated, and work 2 evenings a week outside my home. But primarily, my kids are #1. To me, Molly's behavior was so EXACTLY PERFECT to who she is. A very intelligent, caring, strong woman who has devoted much of her life to caring for her family. I am a U.S. citizen. On September 11, 2001, when all the news was terrifying, I baked cookies and did laundry with every tv and radio on in the house. Doing an "everyday" and "mundane" thing like baking and cleaning helped me keep grounded when I could have been panicking. I love how Molly guides and directs her household both overtly and covertly. Sure, she probably "babies" her kids too much, and doesn't let them fully "grow up". But I have never yet met a parent who doesn't behave that way towards their kids to some extent, falling somewhere between way over-done to not at all. Molly isn't even that far on the extreme end of overdoing, in my opinion. Molly is living through every mother's worst nightmare. A horrible war situation where many of her kids are actively fighting and in danger, others are in harm's way just by the nature of the war, and one has completely estranged himself and is working for the "other" side, at least during the bulk of OoP. Her eloquent stating of that elemental fear..."what if something happens to one of us and we've never had a chance to make up?" To me that was one of the most heart wrenching moments of OoP. Of course, this is just my opinion and how I read her. I love her. To me, Molly Weasley is the most "normal" of all the characters. She is the least characatured, least overdone in any direction. At least, that is how she appears to a mostly-at home mom in "fly over country" of Iowa! I don't mind that most of the strong characters in the books are male, either. I am homeschooling my kids, and I can tell you that on average, girls of the 9-11 age range tend to enjoy reading more than similarly aged boys. Also, as my son is my oldest and the one I taught to read first, I struggled for MONTHS trying to find SOMETHING for him to read that wasn't all geared towards girls, with girls as the primary characters or at least the strongest characters. Little House on the Prairie series. Baby-sitters' club. Box Car Children. Junie B. Jones for the younger group. Ask any librarian. By far the vast majority of series books for the early readers all the way to advanced are geared towards girls. Horse books. Relationship books. Girls are just an easier audience to write towards, so there are more books written to appeal to them. None, I think, with nearly the depth and fascination of Harry Potter, but then, there is only one JKR! To me the most amazing gift of JKR is that she DOES appeal to boys and give boys a chance to read a really good story from a boy's perspective. I don't think it would have been nearly as popular if it had been written identically but with a female leading character. Research of school aged kids shows that most boys won't read a book (in general) with a female leading character, but girls will read a book with a male lead. I'd like to think that JKR knew that and wrote specifically to fill that niche. I think that is why they have been so wildly popular! What parent of a reluctant reader won't go out and spend any ammount at any time of day (or midnight release parties) to buy a book that their child is anxious and willing to read? I choose to think it is because we're more imaginative and adaptable. *grin* And I am grateful to have a good book of an advanced reading level that enthralls my son almost as much as it does me. Anyway, just my perspective. Feel free to disagree back! Lisa From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 00:33:16 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 00:33:16 -0000 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84968 > > Laura: (Kneasy, is LV guilty of stereotyping Harry? ) > > > > Kneasy: > Oh yes. Voldemort stereotypes everybody - including himself. > I mean, a totally black outfit; white face and red eyes? And a pet snake? > Where's his style? > Any self respecting villain should at least invest in a good tailor, for heavens sake. He should smarten himself up a bit, a nicely draped gown, mohair would be good, with a hint of cabbalistic signs woven into the lapels. Patent leather shoes, of course, with the cuban heels and silver buckles. If you want to rule the world, it helps to make a favourable first impression. Laura: Mohair robes with patent leather shoes? Good heavens, man, what are you thinking? Would you wear a mohair dinner jacket? if so, I don't want to hear about it. *shudders* Yeah, LV could probably use a fashion consult. But then, this is a guy (sort of) who grew up in an orphanage and a school for wizards and witches-I suspect his exposure to haute couture was limited. And one more thing-if he'd stay away from kabbala I'd really appreciate it. Madonna has done enough damage already. My 15 year old daughter heartily suggests that LV consider adopting the attire of Dr Frank Furter from "Rocky Horror". She feels that the sight of LV in a corset and heels would paralyze Harry with fright. She could have a point. From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 01:05:01 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 01:05:01 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans -Revisited In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84969 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol: > > I don't think Mark's father (who had to be alive at the time Harry > went to the Dursley's) was Petunia's brother or Dumbledore could not > have considered Petunia to be Harry's only living relative. His > blood would have been as suitable as Petunia's for the charm that > protects Harry as long as he's in a blood relative's home. The > relationship, as I said in a previous post, has to be sufficiently > distant for DD to be unaware of it, and that branch of the Evans > family has to have been nonmagical for several generations for DD to > be unaware of it. I think it's more likely that Mark's father is > Lily and Petunia's cousin than their brother, which would make Mark > and Harry second cousins. ..edtied... > > Carol bboy_mn: I'm not sure who to respond to. I guess your post is as good as any. We /should/ know that Petunia didn't have a brother or HE would have been a likely and very hard to ignore candidate for taking Harry in. Dumbledore specifically says- PS/SS- "I've come to bring Harry to his aunt and uncle. They're the only family he has left now." GoF- "I put my trust, therefore, in your mother's blood. I delivered you to her sister, her ONLY REMAINING RELATIVE." (my emphasis) That pretty well clears it up.... or does it? We have relatives and then again, we have relatives; the two not necessarily being the same. We are completely wrong and off base to think that Mark Evans is any kind of close relative. One thing we must keep in mind is that Evans is an extremely common name in Wales and Western Britain. So there could be no relationship. However, let's consider a relationship that is more likely, if we assume they are related. If we follow Lily's family tree back up to her great, great, great, great, great grandfather, then shift sideways to his brother and follow that branch of the family tree down, what does that make Harry and Mark? Something like 6th cousins? A sixth cousin is pretty close to a being a stranger. I doubt that most of us could find a 6th cousin to save our life. I know, I'd have to do my searching for them in Norway which would be hard since I don't speak a civil word of Norweigian (I can however say some nasty swear words). And in the off chance I did find a 5th or 6th cousin, the likelihood that they would take me in as an orphan (assuming I wasn't a multi-millionaire) would be as good as zero. For all intent and purpose, a very distant cousin, while techinically a relative, would not be considered family for any practical purpose. Certainly Petunia as Lily's sister is a dramatically close relative, and is about as close as it's possible to get. So, my position has always been that if some relationship is established between Harry and Mark, it will be extremely distant. But nice none the less. However, since this thread has come up again (the third time in very recent history) and having given it some thought, I have conceived and alternate possibility. It's possible that they may be second or third cousins, and that Mark's eventual parents were indisposed in someway. For example, they were doing missionary work in the Congo, or research in the Amazon, and came back to England when they learn they were expecting a baby. Not that it matters bacause Petunia, Lily's sister, was available, and there are apparently NO OTHER CLOSE relatives. Problem solved. See also- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/82914 Just a few thoughts. bboy_mn From mrsbonsai at charter.net Fri Nov 14 01:20:42 2003 From: mrsbonsai at charter.net (jastrangfeld) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 01:20:42 -0000 Subject: Is Harry really a halfblood? Or a 100% pureblood? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84970 I have been thinking about this. And I did not see anything about this really, except discussions about his being a halfblood, so please forgive me if this has been discussed. I got to thinking about Jeremy Paxman's interview with JK, where she says that no one has ever really guessed the truth. That some have skirted it, but not gotten there. And I'm rereading OOTP and I got to thinking. What if, mind you, what if Petunia were really a Squib? What if Harry isn't a halfblood at all? For instance, on p205 of OOTP (US version) in the sorting hat's song. I think there's a clue! "Slytherin took only pure-blood wizards of great cunning, just like him." We know the sorting hat wanted to place Harry into Slytherin. And Voldemort. Now we know his dad was a muggle. But was he also in Slytherin? So do they then consider him a a pureblood because of his mother? If Petunia is a Squib . . . Well I'm not entirely 100% certain where to take this. But I'm wondering if anyone else caught onto this? Am I making sense or udder nonsense? They also refer to Harry as coming from one of the ancient families don't they? What do you think? Julie From snowwy54 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 01:24:30 2003 From: snowwy54 at yahoo.com (Susan Snow) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 17:24:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mark Evans -Revisited In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031114012430.70822.qmail@web41314.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84971 bboy_mn wrote: > > So, my position has always been that if some > relationship is > established between Harry and Mark, it will be > extremely distant. But > nice none the less. > > > It's possible that they may be second or third > cousins, and that > Mark's eventual parents were indisposed in someway. > For example, they > were doing missionary work in the Congo, or research > in the Amazon, > and came back to England when they learn they were > expecting a baby. > > Not that it matters bacause Petunia, Lily's sister, > was available, and > there are apparently NO OTHER CLOSE relatives. > Problem solved. > > bboy_mn > Now me: It is also possible that Mark Evans parents namely his father was too young to be eligble to take Harry in at the time of the Potter's death. Maybe 14 or 15 then in a few years married young and had Mark. Just another possibility. Snowwy __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From kcawte at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 14 09:47:03 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 01:47:03 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups]Evans/Gryffindor heritage/Slytherin MWPP References: Message-ID: <001301c3aa94$41cecee0$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 84972 > bboy_mn: > > > We are completely wrong and off base to think that Mark Evans is any > kind of close relative. One thing we must keep in mind is that Evans > is an extremely common name in Wales and Western Britain. So there > could be no relationship. > K So I was about to post and point out that while it is very common in Wales and the West of Britain the Dursleys come from Surrey which is in the East, then something else occurred to me and I don't really have a theory but it struck me as interesting and maybe something that could be important or, you know, total gibberish... People have theorised that since Hagrid flew over Bristol with baby Harry after the death of his parents that Godric's Hollow is in Wales or the West Country. People have also suggested that this is where James cam from originally (after all when you can floo or apparate to work why bother moving somewhere you've never been to before?). Well since Evans is a Welsh name maybe Lily's parents came from that area too (since we know Hogsmeade is the only wizard only community in the UK Godric's Hollow must be muggles and magic folk). JKR has, I believe, hinted that Godric's Hollow has something to do with Godric Gryffindor (and since it's not a common name I can't see why she would use it twice unless they were connected, or she was trying to throw us off something, but I can't really see the point of it as a red herring). So maybe the fact that Harry is a 'true Gryffindor' (and possibly the Heir as some have theorised) is because the Evans' family is somehow related to Gryffindor himself. I must admit my Slytherin stereotype hating self would love that if this were true it also turned out James was a Slytherin. You know one of the arguments for James and/or Sirius not being Slytherins is that they were probably all the same house, but what if they were *all* Slytherins? Peter, certainly, comes across as being cunning (and possibly ambitious, hanging with the big shots all the time) rather than brave, Remus has a deep dark secret and certainly seems a little cunning to be able to protect it so well, Sirius is a pureblood of the type that Slytherin seemed to love, certainly cast in the same mould as the Malfoys and we assume James to be a pureblood - he's certainly ambitious enough, being an arrogant show off, big shot quidditch player and no slouch academically either for that matter. The 'not a witch or wizard that went bad that wasn't in a Slytherin' comment could be a form of double bluff, we're supposed to find out about Peter and thing, ah, that's all exaggeration, that stuff about Slytherins because we assume Peter is a gryffindor but he actually turns out to be a Slytherin all along .... I'm rambling now I know, sorry. K From liz at studylink.com Thu Nov 13 09:15:59 2003 From: liz at studylink.com (liz) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 10:15:59 +0100 Subject: Harry's Popularity In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84973 sharon wrote: > > I still can't figure out why kids at Hogwarts didn't flock to him > when he first arrived. Yes, Draco made an effort & was rebuked > Why didn't the kids at Hogwarts want to do this with > Harry when he first got there being as how he kind of had this star > status in the WW? AP: > I think part of the reason is that Harry didn't encourage "star > worship." Up until he entered Hogwarts, he had apparently been > quite good at being "invisible" in school to avoid Dudley and > friends. Now Liz: I think it's also to do with wariness and jealousy and that teenage thing of wanting to stand out and blend in at the same time. Almost every interview I've ever read with a child celebrity they talk about getting flak at school - some people adore them, but they get a lot of scorn too usually until people realise they're still just boring and normal like everyone else. I have a 14 year old friend who has a friend (who's the second cousin of the guy who painted their house whose sister had an illegitimate daughter who...just kidding!) who goes to school with Dan Radcliffe and she says he got teased quite a bit when he first became Harry. Not very nice but that's people for ya! Liz From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 13 19:03:32 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 19:03:32 -0000 Subject: Lily's and James' Parents In-Reply-To: <20031113141730.69500.qmail@web41211.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84974 Vinnia wrote about Mark Evans: > Sorry, Carol, I should have explained clearer. I did > not mean Harry's grandparents are Mark's parents. What > I meant was that Harry's maternal grandparents are > Mark's paternal grandparents. And only one of them is > still living, not both. > > As to Petunia being Harry's "only living relative": > --start quote-- > PS/SS ch 1: > "They're the only family he has left now." > > Oop p 736 Bloomsbury: > "I delivered you to her sister, her only remaining > relative." > --end quote > > Family could mean someone who shared your blood, or a > social unit, a father and a mother and possibly > sibling(s). If Mark's father was not married when DD > made this comment, then he's a living relative, but > not family. Dumbledore makes clear at the end of OoP that it's blood that counts. Vinnia again: > The second quote would kill my theory, but I will make > a feeble attempt to defend it > What if DD means her only relative that stays > behind(in the muggle world)? Mark's father could have > been a wizard. And his mom/dad could be staying in the > magical world. Though not magical, he/she could be a > shopkeeper or a tutor for under-11 magical children or > muggle studies professor or something like that. > > The ministry doesn't have a record of any wizards > living in little whinging other than Harry, probably > because Mark's father is no longer living? Or divorced > and living somewhere else? > Personally, I think that Petunia is a squib and that > her family was a modest wizarding family way back. The Mark Evans/Harry connection has to be sufficiently distant to conceal from Dumbledore and the rest of the WW that Harry does have living (blood) relatives other than Petunia, so for that reason I think we need to go at least one generation further back than you suggest. My theory is that Mark's parents, who live in the Dursleys' village of Little Whinging, are muggles, but his great grandfather, who is also Harry's great grandfather, was a wizard whose sons (Harry's maternal grandfather and Mark's paternal grandfather) were squibs who married muggles. I think Lily's father was aware that he had wizard blood, which would explain his pride in Lily and his ability to convince his (purely muggle) wife to share that pride. But enough generations had passed that he, too, was to all intents and purposes a muggle and is considered as such by Dumbledore (and Snape). I agree that Petunia is aware of her heritage (and jealous of Lily for that reason) and I think that her knowledge of dementors comes from something more than a remark by "that awful boy" (James), but she can't be a squib if her parents (and Lily's) were muggles--and that's the indication we have so far from Dumbledore, Voldemort, and Harry himself. But it's possible that her father and his brother (Mark's grandfather) were squibs passing as muggles who had disappeared like Mrs. Figg from the radar screen of the WW. Another member and I have created a theoretical genealogy that we hope at some point might be suitable for TBay, but as I'm a newbie and she's an infrequent poster, we're a bit shy about presenting it there or giving it an acronym. Also, Hermowninny wrote: > I agree Mark Evans is important > We know Mark is 10 years old in OOP and we assume he's a muggle . > But what if he's not a muggle. What are > the chances he will get a Hogwarts letter before book six comes out? > The timing is right? I never said that Mark was a muggle, only that he comes from a muggle family and lives in a muggle neighborhood (with muggle bullies who beat him up, one of whom is probably his distant cousin). IMO he's a muggle-born wizard who doesn't know it yet (exactly as Harry was five years earlier). And the fact that he's ten when he's first mentioned has to be an indication that he'll be in Hogwarts next year and his name indicates that he's somehow related to Harry on his mother's side. (See my previous posts.) I don't think for a moment that it's a red herring. Mark will probably join Dumbledore's army. He will also (I hope) provide us with information about his side of the family. He'll be important in some way, we can be certain. Carol From aimking0110 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 03:20:34 2003 From: aimking0110 at yahoo.com (Garrett) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 03:20:34 -0000 Subject: Is Harry really a halfblood? Or a 100% pureblood? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84975 Its a good theroy but Dumbledore explains the sorting hat this way in Cos: Voldermort gave harry all these differant things, one of these was slytherine influence, so in a way you could make the case harry is part slytherine now. Garrett P.S. if this doesnt make since sorry :-P --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jastrangfeld" wrote: > I have been thinking about this. And I did not see anything about > this really, except discussions about his being a halfblood, so please > forgive me if this has been discussed. > > I got to thinking about Jeremy Paxman's interview with JK, where she > says that no one has ever really guessed the truth. That some have > skirted it, but not gotten there. > > And I'm rereading OOTP and I got to thinking. What if, mind you, what > if Petunia were really a Squib? What if Harry isn't a halfblood at > all? > > For instance, on p205 of OOTP (US version) in the sorting hat's song. > I think there's a clue! "Slytherin took only pure-blood wizards of > great cunning, just like him." We know the sorting hat wanted to > place Harry into Slytherin. > > And Voldemort. Now we know his dad was a muggle. But was he also in > Slytherin? So do they then consider him a a pureblood because of his > mother? > > If Petunia is a Squib . . . > > Well I'm not entirely 100% certain where to take this. But I'm > wondering if anyone else caught onto this? Am I making sense or udder > nonsense? They also refer to Harry as coming from one of the ancient > families don't they? > > What do you think? > > Julie From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 02:52:39 2003 From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 02:52:39 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84976 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "queen_astrofiammante" wrote: > Now Astrofiammante: > > But to get back to the point, Carol, if little Mark was a latent > wizard, and rotten Dudders and his gang came along and beat him > up, wouldn't some latent magic have revealed itself? Wouldn't > Mark, as Harry once did, unconsciously defend himself against > Dudley and send > him packing? > Astrofiammante psychobirdgirl(me): The book just says that Dudley was beating up on Mark, it never says that that was all. There might have been some magic involved, I mean Dudley is always a thug but what was so special that Harry remembered Mark. Maybe the book just doesn't mention it but something did happen. psychobirdgirl From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 01:46:26 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 01:46:26 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84977 Brooke wrote: > I agree with many of the other posts replying to this subject. It is > about time that we were introduced to a Slytherin with some moral > fiber. Certainly they can't all be like Malfoy & his disciples. I > thought that perhaps it was the boy Harry noticed in OoP who had also > seen a thestral. > > When Hagrid took his class to the Forbidden Forest to introduce them > to thestrals, Harry, Luna, and one other boy who Harry thought was a > Slytherin held up their hands when Hagrid asked who could see them. > > I realize that the fact that this kid can see a thestral gives us no > indication that he's a "good" slytherin, but I remember getting the > distinct feeling when I first read that part, that JKR had dropped a > very subtle clue by including that seemingly dismissable incident. > > Any thoughts? I had the same thought. I thought the boy was Theodore Nott, whom I mentioned before as the son of the injured Death Eater that Lucius Malfoy told the others to leave behind in the DoM, but I can't find the thestral reference. Anybody? Carol From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net Fri Nov 14 04:58:44 2003 From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 04:58:44 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84978 > Brooke wrote: > > I agree with many of the other posts replying to this subject. It is about time that we were introduced to a Slytherin with some moral fiber. When Hagrid took his class to the Forbidden Forest to introduce them to thestrals, Harry, Luna, and one other boy who Harry thought was a Slytherin held up their hands when Hagrid asked who could see them. Justcarol replied: > I had the same thought. I thought the boy was Theodore Nott, whom I > mentioned before as the son of the injured Death Eater that Lucius > Malfoy told the others to leave behind in the DoM, but I can't find > the thestral reference. Anybody? Now me (Wendy): Ooh! I love this subject, and I do have a theory. I think the boy who could see the Thestrels is Blaise Zabini, who got sorted into Slytherin in Harry's first year. This would prove my theory that Blaise is, indeed, a boy (Blaise is typically a boy's name, but since the Zabini child's gender was never specifically stated, a lot of people have questioned this). I also think he's going to turn out to be the "good Slytherin" . . . what's that? You want canon? Okay CANON: Harry does not know thestral guy's name. (OoP, The Eye of the Snake, page 445, US hardcover): "There were only two other people who seemed to be able to see them: a stringy Slytherin boy standing just behind Goyle was watching the horse eating with an expression of great distaste on his face . . . . " The fact that Harry has been in CoMC class with him for three years now (and presumably taken Potions with him for five) and *still* doesn't know the kid's name indicates to me that Mr. Zabini (or whomever thestral guy turns out to be) has never done anything to attack or insult Harry, either on his own or in conjunction with Draco and his "gang." (And if you're thinking that maybe Harry does know his name, but JKR knows that *we* don't, so just refers to him as "stringy Slytherin boy," well, I'm not buying it. ). So, if thestral guy had ever been awful to Harry, I think Harry would know his name. And any Slytherin in Potter's year who *hasn't* given the Boy Who Lived a difficult time is definitely not living up to the standard of a true Evil Slytherin. Therefore, Blaise Zabini aka Thestral Guy must be good. There you have it. A Good Slytherin. With canon! (Sort of). Wendy From smaragdina5 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 05:20:54 2003 From: smaragdina5 at yahoo.com (smaragdina5) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:20:54 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans -- Pattern of clues and context -- More? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84979 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tigerpatronus" wrote: > And the pattern of the prose is right. As mentioned in another post, > we get a description of Mark Evans, his whole name, and his "cheeky" > personality. JKR said in an > interview a while back that Lily's maiden name was Evans. In canon, > this isn't mentioned until the Snape-Pensieve scene, when James is > writing L.E. and then refers to Lily as "Evans." > > This is the same pattern that JKR uses often in her books, dropping > in a couple words and laying in the context later > What else fits this pattern? There must be more. Mrs. Figg, mentioned almost as a trivial comic item in the beginning of the series, and then at the end of GOF Dumbledore says to get the old order including Arabella Figg... and we see what happens in OOP! good point... smaragdina5 From cmbrichards at aol.com Fri Nov 14 05:02:24 2003 From: cmbrichards at aol.com (cmbrichards) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:02:24 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84980 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" wrote: > I'm still not sure what to make of Mark. I think it entirely > feasible that Mark's father was too young at the time of Lily's death > to take Harry, therefore making Dubledore's comment true if he was > only considering relatives capable of caring for a baby (Lily, after > all, had only just left Hogwarts). However, if this were true, I > would expect Petunia to have at least attempted to pawn Harry off on > him since then. I'll keep waiting for a better explanation. > > -Corinth Now Me; I am sure there are limitless possibilities as to what exactly is the truth to this riddle, but until J.K.R. tells us beyond a shadow of a doubt what it is, I am going to assume Dumbledore's comment meant nothing more than Petunia was the only remaining living immediate member of Lily's family. If it is Lily's blood that was protecting Harry, then it seems resonable to assume that in order for whatever spell Dumbledore used to be most effective, he would want to be as close a match in the blood as was possible . Knowing that Harry's grandparents are dead, and we have not heard mention of another sister or brother, Petunia would be the most likely DNA match for Lily, and by having the same parents, she would "have the same blood" running through her veins . I could be way off here, but this is what I got from the books while reading them, not that there are NO OTHER LIVING RELATIVES, but there where NO OTHERS WITH LILY'S BLOOD RUNNING THROUGH THEM. It is possible that Mark Evans is a distant relative, or even a second cousin, but as far as the "late-comer" we are all looking for, my money will still be on one of the "squibs" or either Petunia or Dudley. I have seen countless agruements saying it can't be Dudley because he didn't "see" the dementors, but I ask you this, re-read that passage. Why did Dudley have his hands over his head? If you felt as though the life was being sucked out of you, wouldn't a more common reaction be to be tugging at your chest area? Just a thought. Christal-Never take things at face value--Always ask why!! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 05:49:42 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 05:49:42 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84981 > > Brooke wrote: When Hagrid took his class to the Forbidden > Forest to introduce them to thestrals, Harry, Luna, and one other > boy who Harry thought was a Slytherin held up their hands when > Hagrid asked who could see them. > > Carol replied: > > > I had the same thought. I thought the boy was Theodore Nott, whom I > > mentioned before as the son of the injured Death Eater that Lucius > > Malfoy told the others to leave behind in the DoM, but I can't find > > the thestral reference. Anybody? > > > Now Wendy: > > Ooh! I love this subject, and I do have a theory. I think the boy > who could see the Thestrels is Blaise Zabini, who got sorted into > Slytherin in Harry's first year. > > CANON: Harry does not know thestral guy's name. (OoP, The Eye of the > Snake, page 445, US hardcover): "There were only two other people who > seemed to be able to see them: a stringy Slytherin boy standing just > behind Goyle was watching the horse eating with an expression of > great distaste on his face . . . . " > > The fact that Harry has been in CoMC class with him for three years > now (and presumably taken Potions with him for five) and *still* > doesn't know the kid's name indicates to me that Mr. Zabini (or > whomever thestral guy turns out to be) has never done anything to > attack or insult Harry, either on his own or in conjunction with > Draco and his "gang." . Therefore, Blaise Zabini > aka Thestral Guy must be good. Carol: Thanks for the quote. I agree that any Slytherins who haven't done anything to Harry (other than possibly laugh at Draco's jokes and wear "Harry Potter Stinks" badges) can hardly be labeled as evil, though it's a bit of a stretch to call them "good" on such limited evidence. As for Blaise Zabini, I do remember him from the Sorting Ceremony, but I'm much more interested in Theodore Nott, whose father is a DE but who is for some reason not a close friend of Draco's. He's also in Harry's year, though only his last name is mentioned. I'm trying to figure out where I found the specific reference to Theodore (whse name I know I'm not inventing) and why I think that he, rather than Blaise, is the "stringy Slytherin boy." OTOH, I Harry knows Theodore's name, it does seem odd that JKR wouldn't use it in the thestral scene. Anyway, as I noted earlier, all the Slytherins except the ghastly trio cheered for Harry when he rode Buckbeak and toasted Cedric's memory at the end of GoF, so maybe there's more than one good (juvenile) Slytherin. (I do like Blaise Zabini's name, so I wouldn't mind seeing more of him, but I want to know what's up with Theo. It's like the Mark Evans thing. JKR doesn't just drop a name. We're going to see more of these people.) Carol From nibleswik at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 06:29:32 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 06:29:32 -0000 Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84982 > *Harry* [emphasis mine] brings up Slytherin, not the Sorting Hat, > and the Sorting Hat never tries to force or advocate Slytherin. It > simple wants to be clear why Harry doesn't want to be in Slytherin > and wants to make sure Harry understands that Slytherin could work > to his advantage. > > In the end, the Hat goes with the very first characteristic it saw > in Harry; plenty of courage. You're totally right! I got it wrong. Thank you for posting that. You make a good point that Harry brought it up. That reinforces an idea present in JKR's work, along with many other authors, that you are most afraid of something in you. Qualities of Harry's enemy are manifested in him, both literally (via scar) and figuratively (via his personality). This Sorting Hat thing is a further reminder of Harry fearing something very present, though not apparent in him. Now that I think about it, one could call Harry's potential for evil (no, I'm not equating evil with Slytherin. I'm talking about the fact that the boy has a bit of LV within him.) a 'sleeping dragon.' Now THAT'S interesting! Cheekyweebisom From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Fri Nov 14 07:03:06 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 01:03:06 -0600 Subject: (CAUTION) Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping Message-ID: <00de01c3aa7d$5b9aa040$fa0d3a41@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 84983 Iggy here: CAUTION CAUTION CAUTION I am adding in this statement because I want to let people know in advance that some of the statements I make in this letter, and some of the words I use may be offensive to the more sensitive reader. These things are said for a reason, are in context, and are only used when appropriate... but they are also the best way to state what needs to be said. I would also like to apologize for this seeming to be a little late in posting, but it had to undergo a few revisions before I could send it in... >Laura: >I'm staying far away from this one except to agree with Pippin that >Anthony Goldstein made me smile too, and I hope JKR is planning to >create a nice Jewish girl for him. *g* Iggy here: Personally, I'm just waiting for someone of Italian ancestry to show up somewhere, since I'm half-Italian, but take after that side much more than my other half... (Blaise Zabini could possibly be of Italian ancestry, but I don't think so.) >Laura: >The Molly controversy is a rather interesting one to me because I >see it as something of an indicator of where we are in the feminist >revolution. Many women (and some men) have learned to be sensitive >to portrayals of women and girls in fiction. We know how profoundly >the stories we read can affect the world in which we live, and we >know that the literary past has often shortchanged, patronized or >ignored female characters. So we are hyper-alert. Iggy here: I grew up in central California, in Santa Cruz... which is quite close to San Francisco and Berkeley. Santa Cruz is often even more rabid about "politically correct advocacy" than almost any other place I have been. I also spent a great deal of my childhood on the UCSC university campus... and universities, as most of us know, are "hotbeds of social change"... I also spent a good amount of time in the '90's visiting friends on that same campus. My reason for stating all of this is to say that I definitely know of where I speak from when I say that there's too many people out there that are so fanatical about making sure a certain gender, race, sexual orientation, etc, gets treated equally and with full rights and objectivity, that they not only tend to overlook other issues while blindly pursuing their own agendas, but they also tend to perpetuate aspects of the political views that they supposedly fight against. (Golly... haven't I said this somewhere before???) I have made the mistake, on more than one occasion, of stating in front of a group of college women and older feminists that there are some areas in which women are still given preference. (One of my more controversial questions to pit-bull feminists who scream for total equality is "Ok.. So are you willing to register for selective service and possibly get drafted into a war that you might not agree with and have to fight on the front line... to possibly die while supporting a cause that may belong to someone else?" Their usual answer is "No, I'm not willing to do that." My reply: "Ok, then when you're willing to be expected by society to take full and equal risk, whether you want to or not, come and talk to me.") Unfortunately, these are often the women who see someone holding the door open for them (even by someone who would hold a door for anyone... male or female..), even out of basic courtesy, as an insult. This is not to say that I don't take women's equal rights seriously... I do. What I try to ask people to keep in mind is that there are expectation often placed on men in most cultures that are as unfair as those placed on women... but they get overlooked because men (especially white Christian men) are seen as having most of the power. They also seem to overlook the fact that only the upper class people seem to have any real advantages. In fact, white middle class men often find it harder to get into college because there are many more programs (like affirmative action) that are seen as leveling the playing field for everyone but actually, to my experiences at least, tend to skew things away from white lower/middle class males having much ability to get into school without great grades and tons of scholarships. A few major points I'll use as examples are as follows: A: I have heard homosexuals say that bi-sexuals were only gays who are too afraid to come out of the closet. This, to me, is a way of saying "I've been prejudiced against so much, I'll make myself feel better by finding a smaller sub-culture to be prejudiced against." Along this same line, I had a debate with a college student who claimed that he was bisexual as more of a political statement than because that's what he was inside... His would be much like if Harry and the other "half-bloods" decided to crusade against Hermione and the "muggle-born" because they feel like they' ve been persecuted by the "pure-bloods" like Draco. Never mind that they have "pure-blood" friends like the Weasleys and Neville. People have also been writing on the OT-Chatter group about Seamus being portrayed as a bisexual slut in some of the recent fan-fics. Should this matter in the long run? If any character expresses love and affection for someone in a manner that's reciprocated, regardless of gender, who is anyone else to say whether it's right or not. B: I have seen women say that it's impossible for a man to be raped by a woman. Yet I have heard of a number of instances of this happening (and it almost happened to me...), and if a man can't come forward with any statement of being a rape victim... If he was raped by a man, he is a wimp or gay. If he was raped by a woman, he is a wimp, or must be gay if he didn't want it. Just as there's more than one form of sex, almost every one of those can be used as a form of rape. When you think about it, this is similar to what the Dementors do to someone. They violate someone against their will. When someone is confronted by a Dementor, be they male or female, they are equal. Biological function has nothing to do with your ability to resist, or your ability to be violated. A man who crumbles to their fear is no less than a woman who does the same thing. Nobody knows whether the Dementors are male, female, or gender-less, yet nobody questions that what they do to their victims are hideous acts of violation. C: I have heard blacks talk about the debt owed to them by the white man for slavery, despite the fact that it was abolished here over 150 years ago and couldn't have happened to anyone within about 3 generations of them within their family. These are the same black people who have said that calling someone (the "N" word.) is hateful, and god help the non-black who uses the word, yet they call each other the same thing... Can you imagine the House Elves being freed from service en-masse and, three centuries later, still declaring that the wizarding world owed them a massive debt for what happened before any of the living wizards were ever born? How about Hermione and the other "muggle-born" and "half-blood" wizards and witches calling each other "mudblood" in a friendly manner, but jumping all over any "pure-blood" who dares even think of using the word? Would this be fair? The reason for this long... well... tirade... if you wish to call it that... is to point out that many people tend to become so sensitive about their chosen cause, that they miss seeing where they actually hurt that cause by becoming fanatical, where they actually end up hurting other people in their over zealous pursuit of their cause, or when they actually only pursue their cause when and how it suits them.. not when and how it suits their cause. Hermione is questing for House Elf rights, but she tends to not think about many factors. Do they want to be freed of their service? Or do they see it as their accepted and honored purpose in life? Does she respect their wishes when they seem offended at the idea of pay and freedom? If she succeeds in getting all the House Elves feed, what then? To what I can see, she wants them freed from service, but hasn't even considered what they're supposed to do with their lives later. Has she thought about tacking on a House Elf Placement Program onto her cause, in an effort to find gainful and respected employment for freed House Elves? No. She feels that her perception of their situation is the right one, and seeks to achieve what she feels is right. whether or not anyone else, the House Elves included, agree with her at all. When one seeks out a cause, it's best to learn not only about the entire cause, but the reasons it began, whether it applies today, whether you support all aspects of it, who it affects outside of that arena, and whether pursuing your cause would hurt the rights of others. (What I mean by that last statement is that there is *always* a way to further your cause without hurting someone else. i.e.: If you try to gain more rights and equality for women, make sure your actions don't try to take away from the rights men have.) Granted, Hermione's cause doesn't hurt others, at least not yet. But it actually has the potential to hurt those she's trying to help. Not only that, but in her quest to promote SPEW, she's trying to not change the minds of her friends, but instead impose her views on them. She annoys everyone, and instead of truly researching her cause and trying to diplomatically enlighten people to her goals, she browbeats them. I think she could do a lot more good for House Elves if she thought things through a lot better. For one thing, she can attempt to improve how the House Elves are treated, without necessarily needing to have them freed or given pay. (Can you imagine the creation of HEWS - the House Elf Welfare Squad? Their job is to ensure that House Elves aren't being treated with cruelty or unduly punished. That they are being treated well and aren't malnourished and dirty. If they need to, they can relieve a family of their House Elf, and place them in a better home. Much like Child Welfare Services. *That's* what Hermione should be working on. *grin*) This narrow minded and overly focused type of attitude, unfortunately, often carries over to affect strong works of literature, film, and music. Even when the creator of such a work isn't out to be an activist, or just wants to create something that they (and hopefully others) will enjoy. The stronger or more popular the work is, the more controversial it becomes. People pick it apart to find the flaws, and find flaws where they want to see them. This, inevitably, validates their viewpoints and further increases their negative opinion of aspects of the work, or the entire work itself. Before I digress too far... (TOO LATE!!) I offer this advice to sum it up... (And I should probably take this pill more often myself when dealing with my annoyance towards fanatics.. *grin*) Be careful at becoming too sensitive or zealous about a cause you support, lest you destroy that cause through that narrowness of mind. >Laura: >My problem with Molly wasn't that she's an at-home mom or that she's >loving and protective. It's that she was cruel to someone who >didn't deserve it at all (most uncharacteristically of her) and who >could have benefited from some love and understanding himself. I >think she made a difficult situation worse, and she had every reason >to know better, having had the benefit of over 20 years of happy >family life and knowing how rare that is, in the WW or anywhere >else. Iggy here: If you can find me one good and kind person who hasn't hurt someone inadvertently in a highly emotional situation, then you are a better observer of human nature than I. Everyone is guilty of this a few times in their life, especially when it's a conflict involving someone they care a great deal about. Married couples should never hurt each other in any way... but it happens. My wife and I have arguments all the time, but still love each other very deeply. Parents and children should never hurt each other either, yet that happens as well. My mom has said and done things that have hurt me to the core, and I have done the same to her in my life, but if I ever heard that someone had caused her true harm, god help them, because that's all that will save them from me. Molly and Sirius aren't married, or parent and child, so why expect her to have more control over her actions with him than she probably does with her own family? Yes, people should know better... but that doesn't stop us from getting overwhelmed by our emotions sometimes. >Laura: >Petunia doesn't get the same amount of flak for her >overindulgence of Dudley because we don't think, judging from what >JKR shows us, that she could do any better. In terms of her >mothering technique, she's a lost cause. Iggy here: I don't think she's a lost cause as a parent. She still has the time, and I feel the potential, to learn the error of what she's done and seek to make amends. I feel that something will happen within the next book that will open her eyes to what's really important and to how petty she and her family have been. Hopefully, she'll learn from is and try to correct things... or at least apologize to Harry. >Laura: >And let's face it, Dudley would have been better off if Petunia >*had* gone to work and left the child-rearing to someone else. >In this respect, JKR is utterly realistic-an at-home mom doesn't >necessarily lead to emotionally well-balanced kids, and a mom >with a paying job doesn't necessarily lead to love-deprived kids. Iggy here: I don't see anywhere where anyone has said that a stay-at-home parent leads to a happy family and well adjusted children. I've only seen that people feel a responsible and caring parent that can lead to a happy family and good kids. IMHO, having Petunia go to work wouldn't have made much of a difference. With the kind of parent she is at home, she would most likely have made sure to hire a nanny that molly-coddles Dudley, and dislikes Harry, as much as she does. Then, if things went wrong, she'd also have someone else to blame for any problems. This would make things a good deal worse, IMHO. A parent is who they are when raising their kids, regardless of whether they stay at home or go to work. Molly and Petunia would still act the same towards their children. In fact, when you look at it, once their kids are in school, the parents still spend almost the same amount of time away from them as they would if they went to work. So it wouldn't really make much difference, would it? I think I'll end this right here, before I head off on too long of a letter... (*ducks as everyone yells "TOO LATE!!"*) Iggy McSnurd From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 07:43:01 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 07:43:01 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin - Stringy & Weedy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84984 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wendy" wrote: > > Brooke wrote: > > > > It is about time that we were introduced to a Slytherin with some > moral fiber. > > Justcarol replied: > > > I thought the boy was Theodore Nott, whom I mentioned before as > > the son of the injured Death Eater ..., but I can't find > > the thestral reference. Anybody? > > > Now me (Wendy): > > ... I think the boy who could see the Thestrels is Blaise Zabini, > who got sorted into Slytherin in Harry's first year. ... what's > that? You want canon? > > Okay > > CANON: Harry does not know thestral guy's name. (OoP, The Eye of the > Snake, page 445, US hardcover): "There were only two other people > who seemed to be able to see them: a stringy Slytherin boy standing > just behind Goyle was watching the horse eating with an expression > of great distaste on his face . . . . " > > The fact that Harry has been in CoMC class with him for three years > now (and presumably taken Potions with him for five) and *still* > doesn't know the kid's name indicates to me that Mr. Zabini (or > whomever thestral guy turns out to be) has never done anything to > attack or insult Harry, either on his own or in conjunction with > Draco and his "gang." ...edited... Therefore, Blaise Zabini > aka Thestral Guy must be good. > > There you have it. A Good Slytherin. With canon! (Sort of). > > Wendy bboy_mn: I'm with you Wendy, if the Thestral Boy was a really bad guy, he would be flying a lot higher on Harry's radar screen. The fact that Harry doesn't know him, tells me that there are Slytherins who are keeping a low profile and just trying to get through school with as little trouble as possible and hopefully decent grades. As I pointed out before we have three Slytherins (presumably all boys) who are mention during various sorting ceremonies and are never heard from agian. They are - (from memory) - Blaise Zambini (SS/PS) - Graham Pritchard (GoF) - Malcolm Baddock (GoF) Graham and Malclom are named directly as part of the sorting ceremony, but look at the sneaky way that Blaise gets mentioned- - SS/PS; scene - Ron has just been sorted - Harry clapped loudly with the rest as Ron Collapesd into the chair next to him. "Well, done, Ron, excellent," said Percy Weasley pompously across Harry as "Zambini, Blaise," was made a Slytherin. Professor McGonagall rolled up her scroll and took the Sorting Hat away. - end quote - The total focus is on Percy as Blaise's name is mentioned as a very secondary background event. It could be the natural flow of the story that we are seening, or it could be JKR planting an important name that will come back to haunt us in the future. It's possible that all three of those boys will turn out to be the Slytherins who stay in the DA Club after Malfoy and his friends leave. As far as the Thestral Boy being Theodore Nott, lets look at what we know. When Hagrid introduces the Thestrals, the Slytherin boy who can see them is described as, "... a stringy Slytherin boy standing just behind Goyle...". Later after the Qibler article has come out, Harry sees Malfoy and friend in the library (Pg515 UK HB) -OotP - Scene - Hogwarts Library - He saw them (Malfoy and friends) with their heads togehter later that afternoon in the Library, they were with a weedy-looking boy Hermione whispered was called Theordore Nott. -end quote- Thestral Boy = stringy Theodore Nott = weedy Both are in close proximity to Goyle, and therefore Malfoy. Although the proximity in the Library is far more critical than in the forest during the Thestral lesson. "Stringy" and "weedy"; both seem to imply thin. So I don't know if we can reach a solid conclusion from the information we have. One could easily conclude that they are one and the same, which identifies the Thestral Boy as Theodore Nott. However, if he was the Thestral Boy, certainly Harry would have commented on it, at least in narrative. That, amoung other things, make me think Nott as Thestral Boy is not the correct conclusion. Now, my own personal bias leans toward them being different people. My position is, that JKR used the Thestral lesson as a means of re-introducing Blaise Zambini, and I'm also a big fan of the mysterious Blaise being the Good Slytherin. Trouble is, that's just a gut feeling; can't prove it. But I do find the backhanded indirect way that Blaise was introduce to be suspicious, and that more that anything make me think he is significant. (Circular Logic) And if he is significant then Thestral Boy would be a good way to plant him into our more immeditate consciousness, and prepare the way for a more promenant role in the future. (Where the heck is that next book!?!) Just a thought. bboy_mn From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Fri Nov 14 08:29:18 2003 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 08:29:18 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84985 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "demetra1225" wrote: > Tonya: > > If Voldie can put into Harry dreams of MOM then why couldn't he put > into > > Percy the need to keep Scabbers.......... Maybe that is reason why > Percy > > is thick sometimes. > > I think it might be possible. > > (snip) > > > > Yes, but I think the explanation given is that Voldemort can put > the "visions" into Harry's dreams/mind because of the link they share > via the scar after the rebounded AK. > So I don't believe that Voldie is playing with Percy's mind. I lean > more towards the Percy under the Imperious curse. I think he has > been under the Imperious since GoF after Barty,Sr. disappeared. > Or possibly, since he found Scabbers. Wormtail could have placed Percy under Imperio at any time from when he was 5 to PoA, as well as in GoF... --Arcum From belijako at online.no Fri Nov 14 08:54:16 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 08:54:16 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups]Evans/Gryffindor heritage/Slytherin MWPP In-Reply-To: <001301c3aa94$41cecee0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84986 K wrote: People have theorised that since Hagrid flew over Bristol with baby Harry after the death of his parents that Godric's Hollow is in Wales or the West Country. People have also suggested that this is where James came from ... JKR has, I believe, hinted that Godric's Hollow has something to do with Godric Gryffindor. Me: I'll give you one more clue for your interesting theory about the whereabouts of Godric's Hollow (maybe it was Godric's property a thousand years ago?) In one of the Sorting Hat's song, I don't remember which, it says Godric was from "wild moor" or something to that effect. Any wild moor in Wales? Berit From nibleswik at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 07:22:52 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 07:22:52 -0000 Subject: Evil and Percy's fate, was: Re: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84987 > ESE!Percy? The Sorting Hat placed him in Gryffindor so I think at > some point he'll show courage Me: Why can't a Gryffindor be ESE? I don't think Percy is; in fact, I quite agree with your likening of him to Quirrell. Still, I see no reason that brave and evil are incompatible traits, just as I think one can be intelligent and evil. I even think you could be loyal and evil -- it depends to whom you're loyal. You could also be loyal and not evil per se, but be driven to evil deeds because of your loyalty. In any case, as I've said before, I think ESE-ness transcends house. Carol: > The hand labeled "Percy" on the Weasleys' clock moves toward > "mortal peril" as his mother watches frozen with horror. . . . Me: This seriously chilled me, probably because I think it's so likely. Just the description, though . . . eek! I'm going to go sit in the corner and think comforting thoughts now. And feel bad for Arthur and Molly. Really, really bad. Cheekyweebisom, who never intended to champion the Slytherins but seems to have fallen into it nevertheless P.S. On a weird note: the original subject line (Scabbers/Percy) made me go, "No. Tell me this person isn't championing evil!rat! Animagus and misguided!bighead!Percy slash. Ewwwwww." Did anyone else have that reaction, or am I just bizarre? Just weird? Yeah, I thought so. From mail at chartfield.net Fri Nov 14 10:23:07 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 10:23:07 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84988 > psychobirdgirl wrote: >There might have been some magic involved, I > mean Dudley is always a thug but what was so special that Harry > remembered Mark. Maybe the book just doesn't mention it but > something did happen. > > psychobirdgirl And Astrofiammante quoted OotP (Bloomsbury hardback) p.131 "'We have no record of any witch or wizard living in Little Whinging, other than Harry Potter,' said Madam Bones at once. 'The situation has been closely monitored, given... given past events.'" Now, the Ministry could certainly be wrong. And it may be possible to explain this away by other means. But, im my most humble opinion, it's another thing that *decreases the likelyhood* of little Master Evans being significant (I'm truly sorry to be such an old grump). Astrofiammante From belijako at online.no Fri Nov 14 11:49:44 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 11:49:44 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84989 Astrofiammante wrote: "'We have no record of any witch or wizard living in Little Whinging, other than Harry Potter,' said Madam Bones at once. 'The situation has been closely monitored, given... given past events.'" Now, the Ministry could certainly be wrong. And it may be possible to explain this away by other means. But, im my most humble opinion, it's another thing that *decreases the likelyhood* of little Master Evans being significant (I'm truly sorry to be such an old grump). Me: No need to be sorry :-) I'm aware of said quote by Madam Bones. As you say, it could be explained :-) For instance, we don't know when a child is "discovered" being a wizard, or when he/she is officially and irrefutably magical. Remember Neville? He was quite old before he showed any signs of magical ability, to his uncle's great distress :- ) Maybe magical children aren't registered in the Ministry records until they're, let's say 11 years old? That's when they get the letter from Hogwarts, and that's when it would be "official" whether they're magic or not. Maybe Hogwarts knows more about the wizard children than the Ministry does... Just a thought :-) Berit From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Nov 14 12:58:22 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 12:58:22 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84990 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > I'm > trying to figure out where I found the specific reference to Theodore > (whse name I know I'm not inventing) and why I think that he, rather > than Blaise, is the "stringy Slytherin boy." It was at the scene after the interview in the Quibbler came out. Theodore Nott was talking with Malfoy and company, because their fathers were named as Death Eaters. Theodor's first name was mentioned and he was described as "weedy" which is similar to "stringy". Also, I read on the Lexicon-Forum an interesting theory, that describing the Thestral boy as "stringy" is a direct hint for him being Theodore Nott. JKR loves wordplays and therefore she used "Stringy Knot (Nott)". I don't know if this was intentionally by JKR, but I sure believe this theory currently. > OTOH, I Harry knows > Theodore's name, it does seem odd that JKR wouldn't use it in the > thestral scene. Harry learned the name later. The fact that he didn't recognize Nott as the Thestral-boy is the only problem I have with this theory. However,Harry really doesn't pay much attention for other people. He didn't even know Susan Bones, with whom he had Herbology for five years. And he didn't recognize the Thestral boy, with whom he had CoMC for three years and probably Potions for five years. Therefore I have no problem to imagine that Harry just forgot that the Thestral boy was Nott (if it was Nott, of course). By the way, I am way more interested in Theodore Nott. I care as much about Blasie Zabini than I care about Rose Zeller from Hufflepuff (and that means, not at all). Nott however, is the son of a Death Eather, in Harry's year, but he is never around Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle, except in the Quibbler scene. So I am really interested to learn more about him. Hickengruendler From lmbolland at earthlink.net Fri Nov 14 13:07:50 2003 From: lmbolland at earthlink.net (goodnight_moon5) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 13:07:50 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans -Revisited In-Reply-To: <20031114012430.70822.qmail@web41314.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84991 Snowwy wrote: > It is also possible that Mark Evans parents namely his > father was too young to be eligble to take Harry in at > the time of the Potter's death. Maybe 14 or 15 then > in a few years married young and had Mark. Just > another possibility. > Lauri: Since we're tossing out possibilities, it's possible Mark Evans' father was adopted. He would, therefore, NOT be Lily's blood relative. It's possible, of course, that the magic Dumbledore used for protection - the BLOOD magic - requires a perfect (or close) DNA match. So, Petunia (having the same parents as Lily and therefore coming from the same genepool) would be Lily's "blood" but Dudly wouldn't - his blood being tainted by being half Dursley. If that's the case, that the blood must be like a DNA match, then even a 1st cousin wouldn't be considered blood relative enough for the protection to work. Another wild thought - if Petunia hated her family (Evans) and disowned them, Mark *could* be a relative whom Petunia simply refused to acknowledge, therefore, Harry would have never known about. Lauri From mail at chartfield.net Fri Nov 14 13:35:04 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 13:35:04 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84992 Berit said: >No need to be sorry :-) If I'm wrong I promise to cook a School Feast for the entire list without the aid of house elves... ;- )) In a way, I hope I am wrong, because it would be entertaining if he does turn up at Hogwarts as the key to solving the whole Evans family mystery: "Harry looked up suddenly as he heard Professor McGonagall's voice say: 'Evans, Mark'. A small, oddly familiar auburn-haired boy with bright green eyes looked very apprehensive as the Hat descended on his head. Without a second's pause, it roared: 'Gryffindor'. The table around Harry exploded in cheers..." I'm as intrigued as everyone else by Petunia's sudden awareness of the magical world and her family is one of my big preoccupations. I personally suspect at least two more of the major characters might be Evanses, or related to them, but that's the subject of another post entirely... In fact, here it is: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84935 I just remain to be convinced about Mark Evans, I think we're having to make too many assumptions and bend too many facts at the moment. But, as I said earlier, his age does make me a little more convinced than I was when I started reading this thread... Have you come up with a good acronym for your theory yet? Here's a suggestion, based on your observation of how he stood up to Dudley: Mark's Undoubted Gryffindor Guise Lends Extra Help Evading Rotten Oppressors (M.U.G.G.L.E H.E.R.O) I'll step off board and swim to the shore now... happy sailing! Astrofiammante From grianne2 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 13:48:16 2003 From: grianne2 at yahoo.com (Annalisa Moretti) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 13:48:16 -0000 Subject: The Awkward Squad, was: Re: Shouldn't Snape hate Draco? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84993 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Suzanne Chiles" Suzanne: > Have we seen that he's good s Quidditch? I just got through re- reading CoS, > and he was a mediocre player at best. > > Suzanne Annalisa: Actually, there's a document in the Files section here which shows that he actually must be a pretty good Quidditch player, except, it seems, when he's up against Harry (and gets distracted by trying to act all superior, I guess). - A. From pmah4600 at mail.usyd.edu.au Fri Nov 14 14:56:34 2003 From: pmah4600 at mail.usyd.edu.au (The Kirk) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 14:56:34 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84994 Berit wrote: > ) Maybe magical children aren't registered in the Ministry records > until they're, let's say 11 years old? That's when they get the > letter from Hogwarts, and that's when it would be "official" whether > they're magic or not. Maybe Hogwarts knows more about the wizard > children than the Ministry does... Just a thought :-) Well, there's that magic quill that apparently records the name of every magical child born- and that's in Hogwarts, not the Ministry. Also, remember that Ron tried that spell on Scabbers in PS/SS on the way to Hogwarts, and (I hope this isn't movie contaminatio) and Hermione doing spells before they arrive. Also remember Aunt Marge- Harry committed inadvertant magic before, but the Ministry h ad no idea. What about the Restriction of Underage Magic? It would seem that the Ministry is for some reason is unable to exert any power on witches and wizards before they arrive at Hogwarts. It's not a strecth of the imagination that this reason is because they don't have any record of magical children before they arrive at Hogwarts. If Mark Evans' parents are muggles, he may still be a wizard, but because he has not been to Hogwarts, the Ministry don't know about him. Roo From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 15:01:20 2003 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 07:01:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: (CAUTION) Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: <00de01c3aa7d$5b9aa040$fa0d3a41@rick> Message-ID: <20031114150120.61231.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84995 --- Iggy McSnurd wrote: > Iggy here: > > I have made the mistake, on more than one occasion, > of stating in front of a > group of college women and older feminists that > there are some areas in > which women are still given preference. (One of my > more controversial > questions to pit-bull feminists who scream for total > equality is "Ok.. So > are you willing to register for selective service > and possibly get drafted > into a war that you might not agree with and have to > fight on the front > line... to possibly die while supporting a cause > that may belong to someone > else?" Their usual answer is "No, I'm not willing > to do that." My reply: > "Ok, then when you're willing to be expected by > society to take full and > equal risk, whether you want to or not, come and > talk to me.") Well, I don't think of myself as a feminist, though I suppose I am one. I think men and women are equal and should be treated as such. I'm also in my twenties, so I don't fit into the "older" category. But I say that if men have to register for selective service so should woment. Equal is equal. Now, I'm glad I didn't have to. But that doesn't mean I think it's right. Rebecca ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 15:02:05 2003 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 07:02:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: SORRY - meant to send that offlist In-Reply-To: <00de01c3aa7d$5b9aa040$fa0d3a41@rick> Message-ID: <20031114150205.43938.qmail@web20010.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 84996 Sorry about that. Rebecca ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From liz at studylink.com Fri Nov 14 13:03:18 2003 From: liz at studylink.com (liz) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 14:03:18 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84997 Astrofiammante wrote: > In a way, I hope I am wrong, because it would be entertaining if he > does turn up at Hogwarts as the key to solving the whole Evans family > mystery: > > "Harry looked up suddenly as he heard Professor McGonagall's voice > say: 'Evans, Mark'. A small, oddly familiar auburn-haired boy with > bright green eyes looked very apprehensive as the Hat descended on > his head. Without a second's pause, it roared: 'Gryffindor'. The > table around Harry exploded in cheers..." Ooooh, I like it. But what about: "Harry looked up suddenly as he heard Professor McGonagall's voice say: 'Evans, Mark'. A small, oddly familiar auburn-haired boy with bright green eyes looked very apprehensive as the Hat descended on his head. Without a second's pause, it roared: 'Slytherin'. The table across from Harry exploded in cheers..." Might be more interesting. Also a way for Harry to get more friendly with some Slytherins?? Or imagine all the ways Draco could torment Harry by becoming big brother/mentor to his long lost cousin (or whatever he may be). Liz From mail at chartfield.net Fri Nov 14 15:34:30 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 15:34:30 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84998 Liz wrote: > "A small, oddly familiar auburn-haired boy with bright green > eyes looked very apprehensive as the Hat descended on his head. Without a second's pause, it roared: 'Slytherin'. The table across from Harry exploded in cheers." And Astrofiammante added something along the lines of, oh I don't know: "Harry felt the cold eyes of Professor Snape, his most hated person at Hogwarts, boring into him from the teacher's table. He turned his head to meet Snape's glare and was sure that the Potions master, just for a moment, gave a fleeting smile of satifaction before looking away." Astrofiammante From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 16:18:13 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:18:13 -0000 Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 84999 Berit wrote: > > I think your answer makes sense Annemehr :-) But, the reason I think > Rowling makes Harry only hear the first part of the Hat's "speech" in > CoS is not only because he needed to experience firsthand that he is > a real Gryffindor, but also because Rowling leaves a lot of clues in > CoS about Harry's connection to the Slytherin house in general and to > Voldemort in particular. The book is just littered with hints that > Harry is not ONLY a true Gryffindor... He seems also to have > inherited something from Voldemort, whether only accidental or not I > don't know, but I don't think parseltongue is the only thing that > makes Harry "equal" to old Voldie... Annemehr replies: I think we are just down to discussing matters of degree! :-) If I read your previous post right, you said that it may be true that Harry was evenly balanced between Slytherin and Gryffindor, and it was only his refusal of Slytherin that tipped the scales. I don't think that is the case, and I don't see that the clues add up to quite that much. I do agree that what Harry received from Voldemort is very important, and we have seen that it's much more than parseltongue and a scar that twinges when Voldemort is near (the extent of what Harry found out by the end of CoS, though DD hinted at more). I'll even go farther and say that there's probably even more to it that we haven't learned yet. I just don't believe it is enough to make Harry's Slytherin traits as strong as his Gryffindor ones. Though Voldemort did mark Harry as his equal, Harry still has the power that LV knows not, the power in his *heart,* where he is, I'm sure, very much a Gryffindor. As a measure of how important I do see this connection to be, I'll note that I once posted a variant to the Stoned!Harry theory in which Harry became a living philosopher's stone the moment LV bounced an AK off his head -- but that is another theory entirely! Annemehr From easleyweasley at aol.com Fri Nov 14 15:57:38 2003 From: easleyweasley at aol.com (easleyweasley at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 10:57:38 EST Subject: English Boarding Schools Message-ID: <147.1c93ab39.2ce65572@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85000 I am a new member of the group, but have read the posts of the last few days with interest. I would like to comment on JKR's conception of British boarding schools, and also on the various comments on House insignia and the like. I regret to say I have spent a looong time working in ENglish Public Schools [for transatlantic readers, these are in fact private schools, with fees of up to $30,000 per annum]. In addition, JKR sets her school in Scotland [or appears to - I can't think of any reference in canon that specifically states this]. Traditionally, Scottish education has been superior to English education [altho there are signs that even this is changing], and so there tend to be fewer boarding schools in Scotland. altho many of them are run on the same lines as their English counterparts. To muddy the waters further, all schools do things differently. However, almost all have a common uniform for their pupils, with a differentiating item to mark which House the pupil is in. For boys, this is usually a tie in the House colours. To confuse matters further, there are often ties for specific achievements - e.g., sporting, cultural, academic - which then means you can't tell the House of a pupil! English Public Schools usually take pupils from ages 13-18, and the pupils would attned a preparatory or 'prep' school first. This leads to to another possible hole in the JKR WW. The Hogwarts pupils have obviously not attended Muggle schools in the past, as most purebloods are quite ignorant of Muggles. However, if there were wizarding prep schools - and there can't be that many - then many Hogwarts pupils would be acquainted with each other before arrival at Hogwarts [eg Malfoy and Weasley]. So where do they go to school? And if they are home educated, it explains a lot about the role of Mrs Weasley. Finally - where does Hogwarts get its money from? It obviously saves on domestic salaries [house elves!] but there would be quite a few other expenses. No mention is made of fees in letters to parents, or anywhere else. Does that imply funding from the MoM? And is there then a wizard income tax? easleyweasley [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belijako at online.no Fri Nov 14 16:44:10 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:44:10 -0000 Subject: What the Sorting Hat REALLY Said, and The Good Slytherin. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85001 Annemehr wrote: I'll even go farther and say that there's probably even more to it that we haven't learned yet. I just don't believe it is enough to make Harry's Slytherin traits as strong as his Gryffindor ones. Though Voldemort did mark Harry as his equal, Harry still has the power that LV knows not, the power in his *heart,* where he is, I'm sure, very much a Gryffindor. Me: I totally agree with you! Harry is definitely *more* Gryffindor than he is Slytherin! His Slytherin "connection" that might be there is maybe mostly due to Voldemort's accidental "bestowement" of "gifts" (or, he could of course theoretically be related to old Salazar as well... :-) So, by heart, Harry is a true Gryffindor, but because of Voldemort's little accident Harry might have some sort of "task"/purpose related to his Slytherin "heritage". So I agree with you; there's probably more to it than we have learned yet. Berit From sylviablundell at aol.com Fri Nov 14 16:46:33 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:46:33 -0000 Subject: stereotyping Molly Weasley and male/female role models Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85002 Lisa wrote : >Research of school-aged kids shows that most boys wont read a book (in general) with a female leading character. Now me: This is mostly true. There is a brilliant book by an English writer, Gene Kemp, called "The Turbulent Term of Tyke Tyler" in which the narrator and main character turns out, in the final chapter, to be a girl. Kemp never says she is a girl. It is left to the reader to fall into the stereotype trap. I cannot describe the pain and anguish of the class of boys I was teaching when they discovered the gender of the character they had all enthusiastically identified with. I think it quite probably that a lot of boys would have resisted reading a book by Joanne Rowling. Incidentally, Gene Kemp is a woman. Sylvia (who has to admit to falling into the trap herself) From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 16:47:52 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:47:52 -0000 Subject: Goyle missing from DoM (Was:Re: The Good Slytherin) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85003 Carol wrote, plaintively: > (I also want to know why people think that Goyle, Sr., seems to have >been absent, but I've > posed this query twice and no one has responded.) Well, goodness knows I love responding to posts, and I've just come up with a theory! The boring, logical part of the explanation is that only ten DEs were assigned to that job, so plenty of them did not attend. But why pass over Goyle in particular? I think I found the answer to that very near the end of the first book: "Harry had almost forgotten that the exam results were still to come, but come they did. [...] They had hoped that Goyle, who was almost as stupid as he was mean, might be thrown out, but he had passed, too. It was a shame, but as Ron said, you couldn't have everything in life." So there you have it. Like son, like father, eh? Goyle Sr. was too stupid to be sent on such a sensitive mission! Annemehr actually believing this might well be true, but writing with tongue in cheek due to the tenuousness of the evidence... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 17:33:22 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 17:33:22 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85004 Christal wrote: > I am sure there are limitless possibilities as to what exactly is > the truth to this riddle, but until J.K.R. tells us beyond a shadow > of a doubt what it is, I am going to assume Dumbledore's comment > meant nothing more than Petunia was the only remaining living > immediate member of Lily's family. If it is Lily's blood that was > protecting Harry, then it seems resonable to assume that in order for > whatever spell Dumbledore used to be most effective, he would want to > be as close a match in the blood as was possible parents/siblings>. Carol: I think you're correct here. That would allow JKR to bring in Mark as a second cousin or whatever, a muggle-born child who's really a wizard but doesn't know it (shades of Harry at the same age) and certainly doesn't have a wand yet. Christal again: It is possible that > Mark Evans is a distant relative, or even a second cousin, but as far > as the "late-comer" we are all looking for, my money will still be on > one of the "squibs" or either Petunia or Dudley. I think you're confusing two different ideas here. My impression is that the "late-comer" is someone who learns to do magic late in life (weren't those JKR's words?), in which case it can't be either Mark or Dudley. Even Petunia is probably only in her thirties, which hardly qualifies as "late in life." To repeat what I've said in more detail elsewhere, I don't think Petunia is a squib because as far as we know her parents were both muggles, but there is clearly a squib or two farther back in the Evans line and some wizards before that since only witches/wizards can have squib children. Hence, magic is in the Evans blood and will probably show itself in Mark Evans, who seems to have been planted in the story in much the same way that Mrs. Figg and Sirius Black were and is exactly the right age to show up at Hogwarts in Book 6. As for the person who shows a talent for magic late in life, my candidate is Mrs. Figg, whom we know to be a squib and who saw the dementors. The only other person I can think of who fits the "late in life" category is, heaven forfend, Filch. Remember the book Harry saw in his office? His jealousy and malice make Petunia's pale in comparison. Put a wand in his hand (with the ability to perform a spell) and he could wreak havoc. (I hope it's Mrs. Figg and not Filch, for obvious reasons.) Carol From nibleswik at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 17:45:34 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 17:45:34 -0000 Subject: Is Harry really a halfblood? Or a 100% pureblood? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85005 > And I'm rereading OOTP and I got to thinking. What if, mind you, > what if Petunia were really a Squib? What if Harry isn't a >halfblood at all? > > For instance, on p205 of OOTP (US version) in the sorting hat's >song. I think there's a clue! "Slytherin took only pure-blood >wizards of great cunning, just like him." We know the sorting hat > wanted to place Harry into Slytherin. > > And Voldemort. Now we know his dad was a muggle. But was he also > in Slytherin? So do they then consider him a a pureblood because > of his mother? Me: I suppose it's possible that Petunia is a Squib. I think there's evidence against it, for example, in SS/PS (I don't have my books, so I couldn't double-check that this isn't the Dreaded Movie Contamination), she says something like, "My parents were so proud. We have a witch in the family!" If this is the movie, I apologize, but that certainly implies that she was the only one. I mean, *a* witch. Not "the five hundred and thirtieth in our wizarding family's rich tradition". Also, LV tells Harry in CoS, "You'll be with your Muggle mother soon!" And would Petunia think Lily was a freak for turning mice into teacups if she'd been exposed to it her entire life? I doubt it. Second, we DON'T know that the Hat wanted to place him in Slytherin. As bboy_mn said in message 84899, an excellent post, Harry brought up Slytherin, not the Hat. The Hat didn't try to push Slytherin or anything. Voldemort is considered a halfblood. A pureblood can't have a muggle parent, as he did. Harry isn't even considered a pureblood, and both his parents were wizards. His mother was muggle-born, though, so it's not pure *enough*. I think the line about Slytherin taking only pure-bloods referred to the time when the founders were hand-picking their students. Keep in mind, also, that one thousand years ago, there were a lot more purebloods, so, while it was still arbitrary, it wasn't as ridiculous. The other possibility, of course, is that the Sorting Hat was exaggerating. But LV's definitely a halfblood. Cheekyweebisom From annemehr at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 18:22:56 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 18:22:56 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85006 > Astrofiammante wrote: > > "'We have no record of any witch or wizard living in Little > Whinging, other than Harry Potter,' said Madam Bones at once. 'The > situation has been closely monitored, given... given past events.'" > > Now, the Ministry could certainly be wrong. And it may be possible to > explain this away by other means. But, im my most humble opinion, > it's another thing that *decreases the likelyhood* of little Master > Evans being significant (I'm truly sorry to be such an old grump). > Berit replied: > > No need to be sorry :-) > I'm aware of said quote by Madam Bones. As you say, it could be > explained :-) For instance, we don't know when a child > is "discovered" being a wizard, or when he/she is officially and > irrefutably magical.[...] > Maybe magical children aren't registered in the Ministry records > until they're, let's say 11 years old? That's when they get the > letter from Hogwarts, and that's when it would be "official" whether > they're magic or not. Maybe Hogwarts knows more about the wizard > children than the Ministry does... Just a thought :-) > > Berit Annemehr: JKR did say something about this in response to a question. As I'd just read it again last night, I actually remembered where it was! So, for anyone who's interested: >From the Scholastic chat of Feb. 2000: -------------------------------------------------------- Question: How can two Muggles have a kid with magical powers? Also how does the Ministry of Magic find out these kids have powers? JKR: It's the same as two black-haired people producing a redheaded child. Sometimes these things just happen, and no one really knows why! The Ministry of Magic doesn't find out which children are magic. In Hogwarts there's a magical quill which detects the birth of a magical child, and writes his or her name down in a large parchment book. Every year Professor McGonagall checks the book, and sends owls to the people who are turning 11. ----------------------------------------------------------- It makes me wonder, though, if Prof. McGonagall just checks the 11-year-olds every year, or whether she peeks at the 1-year-olds too, just to see what witches and wizards have been born since the year before. At least, we know that Hagrid told the Dursleys that Harry's name was down ever since he was born -- did McGonagall tell him that? If McGonagall does check the 1-year-olds every year, she could not have failed to notice Mark Evans of Little Whinging if he was there. Of course, that doesn't help us any, as *nobody* tells Harry *anything!* Annemehr who liked all the Mark Evans sorting ficlets, and wishes she was good enough to write one about Mark's reaction to going to school with the boy he thought went to St Brutus' Secure Center for Incurably Criminal Boys! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 18:44:38 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 18:44:38 -0000 Subject: (CAUTION) Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: <00de01c3aa7d$5b9aa040$fa0d3a41@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85007 In response to Iggy's long post, which I'm mostly snipping because it's long: Thank you for having the courage to express potentially unpopular views in a calm and tactful manner. I agree completely that imposing a particular political or philosophical agenda on a literary work is not a legitimate form of literary criticism, and I left academia for exactly that reason. I was not about to impose my political views on my students, right or wrong, and call it teaching, much less teach the views that were imbedded into the textbooks I was assigned. It seems to me that some of the people on this list are also confusing their views of right and wrong with what the Harry Potter books "ought" to be. Regarding Hermione, you said: > Hermione is questing for House Elf rights, but she tends to not think about > many factors. Do they want to be freed of their service? Or do they see it > as their accepted and honored purpose in life? Does she respect their > wishes when they seem offended at the idea of pay and freedom? If she > succeeds in getting all the House Elves f[r]eed, what then? She feels that her perception of their situation is the right one, and > seeks to achieve what she feels is right. whether or not anyone else, the > House Elves included, agree with her at all. > in her quest to promote SPEW, she's trying to not change the minds > of her friends, but instead impose her views on them. She annoys everyone, > and instead of truly researching her cause and trying to diplomatically > enlighten people to her goals, she browbeats them. I agree entirely with your analysis of Hermione's crusade (which I've shortened as much as possible without losing the gist of the argument) and its potential consequences. The later books could have been shortened by 200 pages if SPEW were not inflicted on us (sorry--my view, not yours). Granted, the House Elfs will probably have some role to play in VW2, but they're not sufficiently integral to the plot to have so many pages devoted to them. But in defense of Hermione (whom we know from the interviews is a caricature of JKR's younger self), many intelligent young people are zealously idealistic, certain that they're right and that adults for thousands of years have been wrong. If only the enlightened teenager could open the adults' eyes! If only the adults would listen to the teenager, they could mend all the social evils that persist into modern times and everyone would be equal and happy. I know what Hermione is like because I was that kind of teenager, too. I "knew" all the answers until I was about twenty years old and had to start living in the world I had been so critical of. JKR has said that Hermione will "lighten up." I think she's going to realize that she can't single-handedly change a society (the WW) that has resisted change for at least a thousand years and that, as you say, she needs to do her research rather than assuming that she's right and use persuasion rather than brow-beating to promote her cause. Frankly, I'd like to see her caught up in the war against Voldemort and forget about SPEW altogether, but that's my particular preference and JKR may well choose some other direction for Hermione. My point is that Hermione is an exaggerated depiction of a particular type of young person, usually female, often encountered in the muggle world. Her self-righteousness will mellow into a more mature understanding of the world and how it works. Whether House Elfs will get their rights remains to be seen, but it won't be through badges and knitted caps and imposing ideas on unwilling listeners. Learning that we don't know everything is part of growing up, and Hermione (possibly with the help of Luna) will, I hope, learn that lesson in the next two books. Carol From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 18:49:54 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 18:49:54 -0000 Subject: stereotyping Molly Weasley and male/female role models In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85008 > Lisa wrote : > >Research of school-aged kids shows that most boys wont read a book > (in general) with a female leading character. > Sylvia wrote:> I cannot describe the pain and > anguish of the class of boys I was teaching when they discovered the > gender of the character they had all enthusiastically identified with. Now Hermowninny: I believe what you both have said to be true, however, I don't think it's the whole truth. I have 3 daughters, and they don't like books with a female lead. I have given them countless books that showcase young girls, and they simply aren't interested. I read every book my kids do before I will let them read it and even I didn't enjoy the ones with a female lead as much as those with a male lead. We have even read several books where the lead characters are a duo- boy and girl--equal and complementary in capabilites and "screen time". Still, we all identified with (and liked) the boy more. When I discovered this, I was alarmed. Does this point to some stereotype in my mind that has been passed on to my daughters, or are there just no good books out there with a female lead? Perhaps it's only natural for girls/women to look to boys/men to be their hero. (Please only throw fruit, no daggers!) -Hermowninny From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 19:29:15 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:29:15 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85009 > Or possibly, since he found Scabbers. Wormtail could have placed Percy > under Imperio at any time from when he was 5 to PoA, as well as in > GoF... > > --Arcum I don't think that Scabbers/Pettigrew could do magic in his rat form, with or without a wand. (Note that PP uses Voldemort's wand to kill Cedric; he appears to have lost his own.) Scabbers does little except sleep until Crookshanks senses his disguise. It seems to me much more likely that Scabbers chose the five-year-old Percy as the child of a rather poor wizard family who would be happy to have a pet that his parents didn't have to pay for. Basically, Scabbers needed a way to live as a rat without staying in the streets and sewers. It's extremely unlikely that he wanted to put little Percy under any kind of spell, and as others have pointed out, he was in hiding from LV and the Death Eaters for twelve years. He had no motive for putting an Imperius curse on Percy (or Ron), for that matter. And note that Percy starts acting strangely after he leaves Hogwarts and Scabbers is still with Ron. A more likely candidate for putting an Imperius curse on Percy is Lucius Malfoy, who frequently visited the MoM and could have put a spell on Percy at any time after Percy started working there in GoF. Carol From stevejjen at earthlink.net Fri Nov 14 20:01:05 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 20:01:05 -0000 Subject: Goyle missing from DoM (Was:Re: The Good Slytherin) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85010 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: I think I found the > answer to that very near the end of the first book: > > "Harry had almost forgotten that the exam results were still to come, > but come they did. [...] They had hoped that Goyle, who was almost as > stupid as he was mean, might be thrown out, but he had passed, too. It > was a shame, but as Ron said, you couldn't have everything in life." > > So there you have it. Like son, like father, eh? Goyle Sr. was too > stupid to be sent on such a sensitive mission! Jen R.: Here's a little more evidence for annemehr's theory that Goyle isn't the sharpest guy: "And here"--Voldemort moved on to the two largest hooded figures-- "we have Crabbe....you will do better this time, will you not, Crabbe? And you, Goyle?" They bowed clumsily, muttering dully. (GOF, US, chap. 33, p. 651) So they're clumsy, too! Surely Voldemort hedged his bets that both of them in the DOM together, near the prophecy orbs, would be disastrous ;). From nineve_laguna at hotmail.com Fri Nov 14 20:28:56 2003 From: nineve_laguna at hotmail.com (nineve_laguna) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 20:28:56 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85011 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Arcum: > > Or possibly, since he found Scabbers. Wormtail could have placed Percy > > under Imperio at any time from when he was 5 to PoA, as well as in > > GoF... > > > > --Arcum > > edited... > I don't think that Scabbers/Pettigrew could do magic in his rat form, > with or without a wand. (Note that PP uses Voldemort's wand to kill > Cedric; he appears to have lost his own.) Scabbers does little except > sleep until Crookshanks senses his disguise. > Carol +++++++++ Sorry, but I don't think we should justify Percy's behavior at all. As DD says himself, every family has a "bad one", including his. Percy is not evil, but highly misguided. I had doubts about him and his relationship with Scabbers before, and I actually started this discussion, but I got a beautiful insight reply by someone (sorry, I don't remember the name, but follow thread by searching the word "Nineve") about Percy's childhood, the time he got Scabby and his life, and after that I am convinced that he is not in allyance with the Dark side, but is only a fool, as Barty Crouch Father was. Percy does not see his actions as highly dangerous and incriminating, but only as the right path to follow. He has always been a fool, and unfortunatelly, I have met many real people just like him. He is deceptive as well in order to get what he wants, remember the bet he did with Penelope in GoF of 10 galeons, and then he admits to Harry he didn't have the money to pay if Harry lost? Well, that just shows what a selfish and greed twit he is. He annoys me endlessly, and this is from the very beggining. Nineve. From jjpandy at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 18:57:31 2003 From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 18:57:31 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans -- Pattern of clues and context -- More? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85012 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "smaragdina5" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tigerpatronus" > wrote: > > > And the pattern of the prose is right. As mentioned in another > post, > > we get a description of Mark Evans, his whole name, and > his "cheeky" > > personality. > JKR said in an > > interview a while back that Lily's maiden name was Evans. In canon, > > this isn't mentioned until the Snape-Pensieve scene, when James is > > writing L.E. and then refers to Lily as "Evans." > > > > This is the same pattern that JKR uses often in her books, dropping > > in a couple words and laying in the context later > > What else fits this pattern? There must be more. > > Mrs. Figg, mentioned almost as a trivial comic item in the beginning > of the series, and then at the end of GOF Dumbledore says to get the > old order including Arabella Figg... and we see what happens in OOP! > > good point... > > smaragdina5 Don't forget that Sirius was mentioned just once by name in the first chapter of PS/SS. When Hagrid arrives at the Dursleys with baby Harry, he tells Dumbledore that he borrowed young Sirius Black's motorcyle. Then no mention of Sirius until Book 3 where Sirius is such an important character that he is the subject of the book's title! (P0A). I've learned to pay attention to any name that appears. Although I completely missed out on the "Mark Evans" reference! I need to get back my loaned-out copy of OotP!!! -JJPandy From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Fri Nov 14 20:49:36 2003 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 20:49:36 -0000 Subject: JKR Morality (was "Stereotyping") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85013 Quick response to a few points raised by Steve: I wrote: >> I agree with Steve(#84678) that a story -- >> like any other work -- should be valued for >> the factors that make it great, and cannot be >> expected to accomplish an infinite set of >> social agendas. >> >> On the other hand, I disagree with the >> suggestion in Steve's post ... that it is ok >> for a bestselling author simply to ignore the >> fact that her book is being read by millions >> upon millions of children. That, to me, is >> like the famous athlete (and there have been >> many) who says "I am not a role model." Those >> athletes are (were) role models, like it or >> not. They can choose to be bad role models or >> good ones, but they cannot escape responsibil- >> ity for their actions. Steve responded: > Well, it's nice that we agree to some extent. > > But I must reiterate that the author does > indeed NOT have an obligation to those millions > of children reading the story. If the natural > course of the story, of her artistic vision, is > to drift in the direction of the most extreme > SLASH fan fiction, then so be it. I'm not sure whether you are making an objective moral claim here or just a practical point. If it is a moral claim, we could continue to debate whether power carries with it a moral duty to exercise the power responsibly; suffice it to say that it does in every widely-accepted ethics of which I am aware. (To be clear, I am not passing judgment upon any particular course of writing on which Rowling has or might choose to embark -- judging the actual practical effects, much less the morality, of her artistic choices would be much more complicated. I am simply pointing out that she, like all of us, has an ethical obligation to consider the consequences of her actions.) If your point is instead the practical observation that Rowling is legally free to write what she will, then it doesn't really have any bearing on my original disagreement with you. The fact that Rowling's popularity gives her a great degree of artistic freedom (as well as a large audience) -- i.e., power -- is the very reason that she has an accentuated responsibility to think about the consequences of her choices. An analogy: Not infrequently, a world leader has the *power* -- sometimes even the legal right -- to start a war. To say that no one can stop him (or her) does not prevent us from debating whether or not it is the *right* thing to do. If you don't wish to get involved in that discussion, no one will force you to, but it would be silly to deny that the decision has moral implications. Steve continued: > As far as the moral quality and role model aspect > of these book, let me point out that every major > religion has endorsed these books as having a strong > moral message, and therefore, serve as an excellent > moral guide and source of role models. Hey, you don't need to appeal to external authorities to convince me that the books have a moral message. I already said that I think Rowling takes her responsibilities seriously: "I believe that Rowling is very conscious of the level of influence she wields. In some areas she has chosen not to preach; in others (personal responsibility, for instance) her books send a very clear message." > However, we need to stop at this point and take note > of the means by which JKR incorporates her moral > lessons. She does it with moral ambiguity, and that > is, to some extent, a conscious effort on her part. > She doesn't want a book of characters drawn in black > and white; she paints them in shades of grey. > > [snip] > > Harry disobeys the rules, and does so frequently to > his detriment and to the detriment of others. However, > in most cases, when he breaks the rules or goes > against clear and specific orders, he does so > selflessly, and acts for the greater good without > regard to his own personal gain or safety. > > How can a boy, who disobeys and breaks rules be the > hero? How can he be a role model for the reader? He > is, because when you look at the bigger picture, you > see that Harry is a good and decent person, who > always puts the value of other over himself. I agree with your basic point, although I think you hit closer to the mark when you say "shades of gray" than when you say "moral ambiguity." I don't think Harry's actions are morally ambiguous in the least. You don't have any difficulty concluding that he is acting morally, and it is perfectly clear that Rowling takes the same view. There is perhaps some room for debate about the ethics of Harry's actions, but the grounds on which they are to be debated (i.e., the relevant moral principles) are fairly clear, and it is not hard for any individual observer to come to his or her own conclusion. What the debate reveals is that most real-life actions cannot be judged by reference to a single moral principle ("don't break the school rules" or "show respect for others"). Even if you picked a tougher example, say Dumbledore (whose strategies have been amply dissected on this list), the morality of his actions may again be debatable but is not really ambiguous. To the extent there is ambiguity, it is largely because we are not given access to all of the information on which DD is acting. > This moral ambiguity is far more powerful method of > teaching morality, than any blatant in-your-face > preachy moralizing pontificated lessons. In fact, the > more obvious in-your-face lesson are most often > discounted or ingnored. > > Moral ambiguity, however, demands that you look deep > inside yourself and ask you own conscience if Harry > is good or bad, if Sirius is good or bad, and > frequenly, we find that the answer is YES, Harry is > good, and yes, Harry is bad. Just like real life, the > answers are not cut and dried; they are not black and > white. So, in the reader's subconscious struggle to > resolve the moral ambigity, they managed to stumble > upon a great truth. > > Truly, in life, the lessons we teach ourselves are > the lessons we learn the best. To be told this is > right and that is wrong, will never carry the same > immense moral weight as *realizing* that this is right > and that is wrong. Here, I think you are making two separate points: 1) that the reader is left to judge morality for him or herself without being forcefed the author's morality, and 2) that part of what makes Rowling's characters interesting, and real, is that their actions are not always perfectly "good" or "bad". I generally agree with both points, although I wouldn't call either of them moral "ambiguity". I think Rowling generally makes her view of the morality of a situation perfectly clear without needing to state it in any authoritative way. And I agree with you that that approach is both more palatable and more educational than the alternative. With respect to good characters acting badly, at times, I agree that this makes them more true to life. Again, I don't think it's an ambiguity (the "bad acts" are unambiguously bad, etc.), but a reminder, as you say, that people, like life, are not black and white. Steve, quoting me: > <<<< Matt continues: >>> > >> When folks say, for instance, "I wish there were more >> strong female characters", they are not saying "JKR's >> characters do not fit my image of what women are like"; >> they are instead saying "there is a particular type of >> female character I would like to see portrayed." You >> can agree or disagree about their choice of words (i.e., >> what makes a "strong female character"). You can agree >> or disagree about whether the characters in the book >> really lack the characteristics others want to see >> portrayed more prominently. You can agree or disagree >> about whether Rowling made good choices in the >> characters she chose to portray. But you cannot really >> deny that Rowling made the choices she made, nor that >> those choices have an impact on the reader (and, in >> most cases, different impacts on different readers). > > bboy_mn: > > When you say, "I wish there were more strong female > characters" and "there is a particular type of female > character I would like to see portrayed", you are > stating an opinion, and as I said, opinions are like > noses, everybody gets one. I didn't say either of those things. I said I liked the characters that Rowling chose to portray, but that others are entitled to their own likes and dislikes. I think this is the same thing you are saying. > As far as yours and the wishes of others for more > developed female characters, I can only say that the > story isn't over yet, and I feel very confident that > before it is done, you will get your wish. I appreciate the sentiment, but again, you are attributing others' wishes to me. -- Matt From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Fri Nov 14 21:13:36 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 21:13:36 -0000 Subject: Goyle sen. in Azkaban? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85014 The resent discussion about why Goyle wasn't in the DoM makes me wonder something. Do you think they will sent him to Azkaban anyway? He was among the Death Eaters Harry mentioned in his interview. And now, that everyone knows he is telling the truth, they have to believe him about Goyle sen., too, don't they? Hickengruendler From kewiromeo at aol.com Fri Nov 14 21:16:59 2003 From: kewiromeo at aol.com (kewiromeo at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:16:59 EST Subject: My problem with teaching Harry Potter Message-ID: <134.27c4f4b6.2ce6a04b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85015 I am friends with this nice woman that turns out to be the Litterature for children teacher in my school. She loves Harry Potter and has given me some suggestions as to what books I might like after reading Harry Potter. I wanted to take the Lit. for children class, but she wasn't teaching it this semester, so I took it with the other teacher in the department that teaches it. When I looked on the sylabus I saw that Harry Potter ss/ps would be read later in the semester. I said, all right, it's on the list, I'll stay in the class. I heard that this teacher wasn't the best, but I didn't think of anything about it. I went through the fairy tales, the picture books, and childrens fiction and such. After reading Alice in Wonderland we got to Harry Potter ss/ps. I wrote to you guys on the problem I had when she started teaching this, but I thought I would tell you the whole story and update you. Aparently, we were discussing class differences shown in Harry Potter, and as Harry is rich he can have Hedwig to deliver his mail, but Ron, whose family is poor, must have scabbers deliver his mail. My teacher thinks the school is like its own little society as the school has its own newspaper, the Daily Prophet. and somehow or another, the entire Wizarding World is called Hogwarts. This is a University level class. It stands like this. If we weren't going to read Harry Potter I wouldnt have taken this class, but at the looks of it, I shouldn't have taken it since the teacher only read the book for our class. Do you guys think I should take it up with the department chair? How can I listen to a teacher who is getting fundamental facts wrong? I would prefer she not taught Harry Potter at all. Which of course meant that I wouldn't have taken the class. I'm not being overzealous for complaining, but these are things that my 6 year old neighbors know. Tzvi of Brooklyn [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 21:19:42 2003 From: lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com (lily_paige_delaney) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 21:19:42 -0000 Subject: Petunia's friend Yvonne - why was she mentioned in Bk1 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85016 With all the chat about Mark Evans and Blaise Zabini being mentioned by JKR for a reason it suddenly occured to me that in Book 1 when Mrs Figg breaks her leg the only two people Vernon mentions as replacement babysitters are Marge and "what's her name, your friend Yvonne" Petunia tells him not to be silly - Marge hates the boy but she snaps that Yvonne is on holiday in Majorca. Why was she so snippy about Yvonne? Could Yvonne be a childhood friend of hers and/or Lily's? She must know about Harry to be considered a possibility. More questions and no answers! Come on book 6! LPD From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Fri Nov 14 21:27:34 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:27:34 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Good Slytherin Message-ID: <104.397f93ae.2ce6a2c6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85017 hickengruendler at yahoo.de writes, ? By the way, I am way more interested in Theodore ? Nott. I care as much about Blasie Zabini than I care ? about Rose Zeller from Hufflepuff (and that means, not ? at all). Nott however, is the son of a Death Eather, in ? Harry's year, but he is never around Malfoy, Crabbe ? and Goyle, except in the Quibbler scene. So I am ? really interested to learn more about him. Ooooo Excellent point!With all the recent talk about Blaise Zambini, I had compleetely forgotton about this! I reckon the fact that he is not one of Malfoy's cronies will be a factor. What if Nott's cunning ways are that of escaping the ideals of his parents? He *could* be the good Slytherin. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 21:33:02 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 21:33:02 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans - enters the wizard world. (near OT) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85018 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "queen_astrofiammante" wrote: > Liz wrote: > > > "A small, oddly familiar auburn-haired boy with bright green > > eyes looked very apprehensive as the Hat descended on his head. > Without a second's pause, it roared: 'Slytherin'. The table across > from Harry exploded in cheers." > > And Astrofiammante added something along the lines of, oh I don't > know: > > "Harry felt the cold eyes of Professor Snape, his most hated person > at Hogwarts, boring into him from the teacher's table. He turned his > head to meet Snape's glare and was sure that the Potions master, just > for a moment, gave a fleeting smile of satifaction before looking > away." > > Astrofiammante bboy_mn: The scenerio outlined by others seems very likely, but here is how I saw things unfolding (short version). Harry is at home at the Dursley nearly bored to tears. Suddenly the door bell rings. (skipping many details) It's Mark Even. Mark hands Harry and envelope, "I'm suppose to give this to you." That's odd, Harry thought as he opened the envelope that was clearly from Hogwarts. It was a letter from the school asking Harry to speak with Mark's parents about the school and assist them in getting Mark's school supplies from Diagon Alley and assisting Mark with getting onto Platform 9-3/4. Fade to Black.... The reason I like this scenerio is that it is sufficiently shocking to Harry, but it also helps explain how muggle-borns manage to get to Diagon Alley and into Platform 9-3/4. A question that has been plaguing the group for a long time. Although, I can't help but question whether Harry is the right person to talk to anxious parents about the school. If Harry starts relating his adventure, they will probably lock poor Mark in the cupboard and never let him out. On the other other hand, it might make a pleasant break from the otherwise dull existance at Privet Drive. Just a thought, and I acknowledge to the list elves that we are drifting away from official canon, but I promise not to take this thread too far without finding some connection to the real Potterverse. bboy_mn From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Fri Nov 14 21:34:42 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:34:42 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mark Evans Message-ID: <145.1c83543c.2ce6a472@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85019 Hello pmah4600 at mail.usyd.edu.au, In reference to your comment: ? If Mark Evans' parents are muggles, he may still be a ? wizard, but because he has not been to Hogwarts, the ? Ministry don't know about him. Roo, but Dumbledore would have known. At the end of OoP when DD sits down with Harry and 'tells him everything', I would think that he would have mentioned if Mark was relative. His disclosed everything else to Harry, so why keep a secret that would give Harry family? Really, I am not convinced on the Mark Evans relations theories. After DD tells Harry that either he ( Harry) or Voldemort must die so the other could live, if he had any good news, he should have shared it. It just doesn't make sense. It would be wonderful to see Harry reunited with some of his family since what he has for family is lacking, but I truly think DD would have said something. -Tonks, wondering why, if the theory pans out, DD didn't say anything when he opened up to Harry. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 14 21:29:11 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 21:29:11 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85020 Having just caught up with the last hundred or so messages which seemed to appear while I blinked, I have been pondering over our friend Mark Evans and felt I could add a few thoughts. (1) On the question of Petunia being the only living relative, we have looked at the possiblity of folk further over on the family tree. I mentioned in a message some weeks ago on this very topic that I went to Yorkshire earlier this year to meet a distant cousin on my father's side of the family. I knew of her existence but never realised that she was a family member until after my father's death ten years ago. Although I am related to her, if someone were to ask me to name my cousins etc., I think I would be inclined to forget to include her on the list. She is in fact a relative via my great- grandparents... and don't ask me which cousin that makes her. Pass. If such a situation obtained with Harry and Mark, would Dumbledore necessarily be aware of it? (2) Someone reminded us that Madame Bones commented that there were no wizards recorded as being in Little Whinging. This overlooked Arabella Figg, who was a squib. It is therefore possible that Mark is the child of squibs or a muggle and squib who have evaded the surveillance of the Ministry. (3) On the subject of accidental magic. Harry has performed this on various occasions as we know - the hair growing, the roof, the zoo, Aunt Marge's wineglass, Aunt Marge herself and so on. We also know that on occasions, he has been bullied by Dudley and his sidekicks. What triggers off this reaction? Is it just chance? Does his fear or anger have to reach a certain point on the dial before his head of steam blows? I do get a feeling that Harry is more aware of accidental magic as time goes on: "Harry got through the next three days by forcing himself to think about his 'Handbook of Do-it-Yourself Broomcare' whenever Aunt Marge started on him. This worked quite well...." (POA p.25 UK edition) This implies that he has become more conscious of the possibility of something happening. Geoff From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au Fri Nov 14 06:27:19 2003 From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 16:27:19 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping References: Message-ID: <000101c3aaf8$58888860$76984cca@Monteith> No: HPFGUIDX 85021 ----- Original Message> Liz here: > > I think Dumbledore does support a change in the circumstances of elves, just > not in the vociferous way Hermione does. He takes Dobby and Winky in as a > completely free elves, offers to pay them more than they want and tells > Dobby he can call him a 'balmy old codger' (I love that line). He stresses > the importance of treating Kreacher well, and he said something to the > effect that Kreacher is what he was made by wizards, indicating to me an > awareness that changes need to be made to stop more Kreachers being created. > I just think DD, being somewhat older and wiser than Hermione, knows that > sudden freedom for all elves would be disastrous for the elves and the WW. > DD seems to me to be the kind of person who prefers to influence ethical > issues by his living example and by giving advice when it is asked for or > when he senses receptivity, whereas Hermione does it by preaching and > constantly offering unasked for advice. I do however think their ethical > outlooks and goals are quite similar. I agree. I think that Hermione has the right idea, but the wrong end of the stick. The House Elves (most of them), seem fairly content with the status quo. Granted, they aren't all in servitude to families like the Malfoys, either. It is the wizarding world's attitude to the Elves and their situation that needs readjusting. Hopefully, Hermione will realise where her style is lacking and lighten up, although dismantling the 'tradition' of many centuries is probably not going to be achieved with a light-handed approach. Nox From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 21:51:13 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 21:51:13 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85022 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "The Kirk" wrote: > Berit wrote: > > ) Maybe magical children aren't registered in the Ministry records > > until they're, let's say 11 years old? > Kirk: > > ... magic quill that apparently records the name of every magical > child born- and that's in Hogwarts, not the Ministry. > > ... Ron tried that spell on Scabbers in PS/SS on the way to > Hogwarts, and Hermione doing spells before they arrive. ..., but the > Ministry had no idea. What about the Restriction of Underage Magic? > > ...edited... ... this reason is because they don't have any record > of magical children before they arrive at Hogwarts. > > If Mark Evans' parents are muggles, he may still be a wizard, but > because he has not been to Hogwarts, the Ministry don't know about > him. > > Roo bboy_mn: What you said is more consistent with my line of thinking. Mr. Figg is clearly in her 70's, and Fudge would have evaluated her presents in Little Whinging based on his knowledge of educated adult wizards and witches. As you pointed out, I suspect that pre-Hogwarts, and Hogwarts students are not tracked by the same means as adult wizards. I suspect that pre-Hogwarts are generally completely under the Ministry's radar screen, and that they are aware of Hogwarts students but only monitor them under special circumstances. For security reasons, and to keep the Accidental Magic Revesal Squads informed, the residents of most adult wizards and witches would be kept track of. This would seem vital information in the Ministry's quest to keep the muggle world ignorant of the magic world. Just a thought. bboy_mn From tammy at mauswerks.net Fri Nov 14 22:08:24 2003 From: tammy at mauswerks.net (Tammy Rizzo) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 17:08:24 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] My problem with teaching Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <134.27c4f4b6.2ce6a04b@aol.com> Message-ID: <3FB50C08.26168.3649C7D@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 85023 Tzvi of Brooklyn wrote: > Aparently, we were discussing class differences shown in Harry Potter, > and as Harry is rich he can have Hedwig to deliver his mail, but Ron, > whose family is poor, must have scabbers deliver his mail. My teacher > thinks the school is like its own little society as the school has its > own newspaper, the Daily Prophet. and somehow or another, the entire > Wizarding World is called Hogwarts. > > This is a University level class. It stands like this. If we weren't > going to read Harry Potter I wouldnt have taken this class, but at the > looks of it, I shouldn't have taken it since the teacher only read the > book for our class. > > Do you guys think I should take it up with the department chair? It sounds to me like this teacher read a book report on the Cliff's Notes version of SS/PS, and should NOT be teaching it until she's read it herself about five or six times. She obviously does not know her curriculum, at least as far as HP goes, and that doesn't bode well for the rest of her subject matter, either. I would discuss it with the department chair, yes, absolutely. It throws doubt on ALL this teacher's classes! *** Tammy tammy at mauswerks.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Fri Nov 14 22:11:59 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 17:11:59 EST Subject: OT, but please don't send me a howler... lol Message-ID: <6.1c1c430a.2ce6ad2f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85024 I just have to share this with the list members. Some of you know my old email was a Sirius Black address, but since I have changed over to this one. Today, a little boy began emailing me and Im-ming me He thinks I am the *real* Tonks, and his imagination is so vivid, I cannot destroy it for him. He wrote me a long letter about Harry and Fudge and asked me to pass on a message to Fudge for him. -- 'Albus will rule the Ministry'. After talking with him at great length, he gave me messages for everyone in the WW, and was very understanding that Harry cannot use a computer at Hogwarts. In fact, it all made me feel like I was a part of the WW, and it was too much fun inventing answers to questions like 'Have you seen Lupin lately?' and the like. -Tonks who is nutters. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belijako at online.no Fri Nov 14 22:21:51 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 22:21:51 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: <145.1c83543c.2ce6a472@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85025 Tonks wrote: > Roo, but Dumbledore would have known. At the end of OoP when DD sits down > with Harry and 'tells him everything', I would think that he would have mentioned > if Mark was relative. His disclosed everything else to Harry, so why keep a > secret that would give Harry family? It just doesn't make sense. I truly think DD would have said > something. Me: Give me one example, one incident where Dumbledore ever told Harry the whole story... :-) He never does, does he... I'm not at all sure he told the whole story in OoP either, though he said he did... After all, there are still two more books to go! Dumbledore seems to have a plenty of reasons for keeping a lot of things secret for Harry, and I have no problem believing he would keep Mark a secret too; there's always a reason :-) I don't find it odd at all if Dumbledore knew about Mark but just didn't find it appropriate to tell Harry (yet)! It would be very much in line with Rowling's DD :-) Berit From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 22:35:13 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 22:35:13 -0000 Subject: OT, but please don't send me a howler... lol In-Reply-To: <6.1c1c430a.2ce6ad2f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85026 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > Today, a little boy began emailing me and Im-ming me He thinks I am the *real* Tonks, and his imagination is so vivid, I cannot destroy it for him. > In fact, it all made me feel like I was a part of the WW, and it was too much fun inventing answers to questions like 'Have you seen Lupin lately?' and the like. Laura: I think that's great! But what will you tell him when he asks if Sirius is really dead? *g* Umm...*have* you seen Lupin lately? *another g* From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 19:16:09 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:16:09 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin - Stringy & Weedy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85027 Wendy wrote: > > ... I think the boy who could see the Thestrels is Blaise Zabini, > > who got sorted into Slytherin in Harry's first year. > > CANON: Harry does not know thestral guy's name. (OoP, The Eye of the > > Snake, page 445, US hardcover): "There were only two other people > > who seemed to be able to see them: a stringy Slytherin boy standing > > just behind Goyle was watching the horse eating with an expression > > of great distaste on his face . . . . " > bboy_mn wrote: > As far as the Thestral Boy being Theodore Nott, lets look at what we know. > > When Hagrid introduces the Thestrals, the Slytherin boy who can see > them is described as, "... a stringy Slytherin boy standing just > behind Goyle...". Later after the Qibler article has come out, Harry > sees Malfoy and friend in the library (Pg515 UK HB) > > -OotP - Scene - Hogwarts Library - > > He saw them (Malfoy and friends) with their heads togehter later that > afternoon in the Library, they were with a weedy-looking boy Hermione > whispered was called Theordore Nott. Carol: Thanks. This is the quote I was looking for. Can someone please provide a page number from the American edition, or at least a chapter title? bboy_m again: > Thestral Boy = stringy > Theodore Nott = weedy > Both are in close proximity to Goyle, and therefore Malfoy. Although > the proximity in the Library is far more critical than in the forest > during the Thestral lesson. > > "Stringy" and "weedy"; both seem to imply thin. So I don't know if we > can reach a solid conclusion from the information we have. > > One could easily conclude that they are one and the same, which > identifies the Thestral Boy as Theodore Nott. However, if he was the > Thestral Boy, certainly Harry would have commented on it, at least in > narrative. That, amoung other things, make me think Nott as Thestral > Boy is not the correct conclusion. Carol: Even though we see the story from Harry's point of view, he isn't the narrator and consequently on what he sees except in dialogue and internal monologue, which is often paraphrased. The absence of a comment could simply be JKR's narrative strategy of keeping the boy in the background. bboy_m again: > Now, my own personal bias leans toward them being different people. My > position is, that JKR used the Thestral lesson as a means of > re-introducing Blaise Zambini, and I'm also a big fan of the > mysterious Blaise being the Good Slytherin. Trouble is, that's just a > gut feeling; can't prove it. But I do find the backhanded indirect way > that Blaise was introduce to be suspicious, and that more that > anything make me think he is significant. I think the introduction of Theodore Nott is equally backhanded. More important to my way of thinking, his father is a Death Eater and yet Theodore is not a close friend of Draco's. Why not? What role is this boy going to play? Surely JKR has not made him the son of a Death Eater for no reason. And as I noted in an earlier post, Lucius Malfoy treats the older Nott with contempt, telling the others to leave him behind when he's injured in the DoM. I think there's going to be contention among the Slytherins, and whatever the case with the mysterious Blaise, the "weedy" Theodore Nott will come out of hiding and do something significant, for good or ill. Carol From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Fri Nov 14 22:40:41 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 22:40:41 -0000 Subject: My problem with teaching Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <134.27c4f4b6.2ce6a04b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85028 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, kewiromeo at a... wrote: (snip) > > I heard that this teacher wasn't the best, but I didn't think of anything > about it. Now you're aware. An oriental proverb says that we never stumble twice over the same stone. (snip)> > Aparently, we were discussing class differences shown in Harry Potter, and as > Harry is rich he can have Hedwig to deliver his mail, but Ron, whose family > is poor, must have scabbers deliver his mail. My teacher thinks the school is > like its own little society as the school has its own newspaper, the Daily > Prophet. and somehow or another, the entire Wizarding World is called Hogwarts. Thanks God, she didn't taught you there were cheerleaders during the Quidditch games. But maybe she was, in a very refined way, trying to check that you had read seriously your book. Maybe she was expecting some of you to rectify her wilful mistakes. You put down all her pedagogical stategy, you're not very cooperative IMVHO. > This is a University level class. It stands like this. If we weren't going to > read Harry Potter I wouldnt have taken this class, but at the looks of it, I > shouldn't have taken it since the teacher only read the book for our class. > > Do you guys think I should take it up with the department chair? How can I > listen to a teacher who is getting fundamental facts wrong? I would prefer she > not taught Harry Potter at all. Which of course meant that I wouldn't have > taken the class. I'm not being overzealous for complaining, but these are things > that my 6 year old neighbors know. > > Tzvi of Brooklyn I remember the guy who was pertending to teach us Jorge Luis Borges and didn't understand his books (I had to read a comic by Hugo Pratt to notice how wonderful a writer Borges was). I remember too the other guy, who was trying to make us believe he knew how to analyse a play by Lope de Vega or Tirso de Molina (one year reading what another teacher had written, and trying to make us believe it was his own work). And there was another one, who was firmly believing that reciting what was in a book was enough to explain it(four classes telling us Madame Bovary by Flaubert)... I'm glad to see that ignorance in University level is sometimes international, and I wish you good luck! Amicalement, Iris From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Fri Nov 14 22:44:58 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 22:44:58 -0000 Subject: OT, but please don't send me a howler... lol In-Reply-To: <6.1c1c430a.2ce6ad2f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85029 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > I just have to share this with the list members. Some of you know my old > email was a Sirius Black address, but since I have changed over to this one. > Today, a little boy began emailing me and Im-ming me He thinks I am the *real* > Tonks, and his imagination is so vivid, I cannot destroy it for him. He wrote me > a long letter about Harry and Fudge and asked me to pass on a message to Fudge > for him. -- 'Albus will rule the Ministry'. > > After talking with him at great length, he gave me messages for everyone in > the WW, and was very understanding that Harry cannot use a computer at > Hogwarts. > > In fact, it all made me feel like I was a part of the WW, and it was too much > fun inventing answers to questions like 'Have you seen Lupin lately?' and the > like. > > -Tonks who is nutters. > No, you'd better write: "Tonks, who is very lucky"! Amicalement, Iris From romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 19:34:27 2003 From: romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com (Federica Bianchi) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 11:34:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: The shadow from the East Message-ID: <20031114193427.99715.qmail@web20705.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85030 [Elf note - this post contains mild spoilers for the first Lord of the Rings movie and the ending of _Lord of the Rings_.] S P O I L E R S P A C E Hi, everyone. I was watching LOTR just now (the extended edition). At the very beginning when Galadriel's voiceover tells the story of the ring, she says that there were rumors of a shadow from the east which is, of corse Sauron returning. Well, as we all know, when he escaped in rat form, Pettigrew heard from his furry friends of a shadow possessing them in Albania (which happens to be east of England, well, south-east). I thought it was a strange coincidence, especially in light of the PP-Gollum comparisons floating around. Maybe the idea that PP will be the one who (unwittingly?) helps HP to rid the world of LV (the other's hand, anyone?) is not so farfetched, afterall. Well, what do yo all guys think? Romulus Lupin (Remus's smarter brother, after all I wasn't the one bitten by a werewolf, was I?) --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 20:22:13 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 20:22:13 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85031 > Astrofiammante quoted OotP (Bloomsbury hardback) p.131 > > "'We have no record of any witch or wizard living in Little Whinging, > other than Harry Potter,' said Madam Bones at once. 'The situation > has been closely monitored, given... given past events.'" > > Now, the Ministry could certainly be wrong. And it may be possible to > explain this away by other means. But, im my most humble opinion, > it's another thing that *decreases the likelyhood* of little Master > Evans being significant Carol: On the contrary, the MoM has already shown that it has no record of Mrs. Figg, a squib at least one of whose parents must have been a witch or wizard. It quite likely has no record of Mark's family, either, since they have been either squibs or muggles for several generations. The MoM would not necessarily have access to the book that records the births of magical children, which is kept at Hogwarts. Carol, who is wondering why you don't want little Mark to be important and how you can discount his age and name, which seem to me to be obvious clues to his significance From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 22:59:05 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 22:59:05 -0000 Subject: JKR Morality (was "Stereotyping") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85032 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" wrote: > Quick response to a few points raised by Steve: > > I wrote: > > >> ..., I disagree ... that it is ok for a bestselling author simply > >> to ignore the fact that her book is being read by millions > >> upon millions of children. > > Steve responded: > > > But I must reiterate that the author does indeed NOT have an > > obligation to those millions of children reading the story. If the > > ...story, ..., is to drift in the direction of the most extreme > > SLASH fan fiction, then so be it. > > MATT: > > I'm not sure whether you are making an objective moral claim here or > just a practical point. If it is a moral claim, we could continue to > debate whether power carries with it a moral duty to exercise the > power responsibly; suffice it to say that it does in every > widely-accepted ethics of which I am aware. ...edited... > > If your point is instead the practical observation that Rowling is > legally free to write what she will, then it doesn't really have any > bearing on my original disagreement with you. ...edited... > bboy_mn: If you and only quoted the first line of the next paragraph which began... "Now realistically, my sick little scenerio is never going to happen, ..." I used an example in the extreme to illustrate the point. In reality, it is clear that JKR DOES have a sharp eye out for the 'appropraiteness ratings' of her books. Look at the way she handles swear words. Even Harry's kiss with Cho never really occurred on the printed page. It happened off page and was related to us in conversation with Ron after the fact. So, JKR is giving due consideration to the appropriateness of her books. In doing this, I think her only objective is to write the story so it does not exclude any age group. However, she has said as well as implied that she is not specifically writing children's books, and by the same token, is not specifically writing literature for adults. She is writing this story for herself. She is telling the tale the way she knows it must be told, and I still say beyond her own internal moral compass as a writer independant of the story, she will not and should not bow to or be guided by the demands of the reader. Readers do not want Harry to die in the end. I have predicted a worldwide day of mourning that will create a grief that will come close to crippling the world, if Harry Potter dies in the end. It could be beyond the magnitude of the death of any living person in history. Keep in mind, that just my opinion. BUT, and that is a big but, JKR will not compromise her artistic vision to save the world that grief. You may say it is immoral or unethical or just plain nasty of her to inflict that on use. But if Harry was destine to die from the beginning, then I think I can safely say that reader's feelings be damned; Harry will be dead in the end. The point is, that a good author writes with consideration for her readers, but she does not bow to their will. If they know so much, screw 'em (pardon the French), let them go write their own books. On the issue of Moral Ambiguity, it's clear from what you said that we are on the same page in this matter. In saying moral ambiguity, I was simply implying that characters are not absolutely 'Brady Bunch' good or 'Snidely Whiplash' bad. (Am I the only one who knows who Snidely Whiplash is?) Harry is not TV sit-com Disney World good. There is a level of moral uncertainty. We see many things he does that are wrong by the fromal standard of the world around him, but we as reader see deeper, and see that he is guided by strong moral fiber. But it's not 'listen to what I'm telling you and accept it' obvious; it's more 'see what you see, feel what you feel, and know what you know' obvious. While you question the terms I used, based on what you said, I think we are in sync on this aspect of the discussion. And I admit, that 'ambiguity' wasn't a perfect fit for the 'shades of grey' I was trying to reflect, but I was having trouble coming up with a brief direct term that said it all. > Matt quoting me quoting him: > > > > bboy_mn (in previous post): > > > > When you say, "I wish there were more strong female > > characters" and "there is a particular type of female > > character I would like to see portrayed", you are > > stating an opinion, and as I said, opinions are like > > noses, everybody gets one. > To which Matt replies: > > I didn't say either of those things. > > I appreciate the sentiment, but again, you are attributing others' > wishes to me. > > -- Matt bboy_mn: Sorry about the misquote. When threads and posts start getting unusually long, it's easy to lose track of who said what. Based on this recent post, if I had to restate myself in the most concise possible way (one can only hope), I guess I would say that any author writes with some consideration to the audience, but does not have any obligation to bow to the will, or social or political desires of that audience. Once you let the readers start writing the book, the artistic vision is lost, and it is to the artistic vision that the writer has the highest allegiance. If Harry is destine by artistic vision to die, then like it or not, in the end, Harry will be dead. Just a thought. bboy_mn From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Fri Nov 14 22:59:19 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 17:59:19 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] The shadow from the East Message-ID: <79.1c9add6f.2ce6b847@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85033 Hello romuluslupin1 at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? Hi, everyone. I was watching LOTR just now (the ? extended edition). At the very beginning when ? Galadriel's voiceover tells the story of the ring, she ? says that there were rumors of a shadow from the east ? which is, of corse Sauron returning. Well, as we all ? know, when he escaped in rat form, Pettigrew heard ? from his furry friends of a shadow possessing them in ? Albania (which happens to be east of England, well, ? south-east). I thought it was a strange coincidence, ? especially in light of the PP-Gollum comparisons ? floating around. Maybe the idea that PP will be the one ? who (unwittingly?) helps HP to rid the world of LV (the ? other's hand, anyone?) is not so farfetched, afterall. ? Well, what do yo all guys think? Romulus Lupin ? (Remus's smarter brother, after all I wasn't the one ? bitten by a werewolf, was I?) I don't think the idea is far fetched at all. Harry saved PP's life and PP, therefor is indebted to him. It's another one of those special magics. What we don't know is ifMouldy Voldy knows about this. As DD said, paraphrased ( To Harry) 'You sent him ( Voldy) a servant in your debt'. I still think this is very important. However, I sat there reading GoF and kept wondering when Wormtail was going to get off his snivelling bum and *do* something.... I suspect things must get more violent and dangerous for him to take action. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Fri Nov 14 23:21:56 2003 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:21:56 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85034 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Inge" > wrote: > > What if you all could attend a press-meeting with Rowling right > now - > > and you were allowed to ask her just one single question > > > Jen: > > 1) What is the significance of Harry's and Lily's green, almond- > shaped eyes? Carolyn: I'm hundreds of posts behind at the moment, owing to rashly trying to engage with the RW instead of the WW, but had a quick check of this thread and didn't find a response on this one, so here goes. I just watched the PS/SS movie the other night for the umpteenth time, and noticed that Harry's eyes were not green. I searched the HPFGU movie site, and found that this was because the actor couldn't wear the necessary contact lenses. Now, I have followed a lot of threads on the books site as to how important it is that both Harry and Lily have green eyes, and that this is supposed to be a BIG CLUE of some sort. However, it seems to have been something that JKR seems to have let go for the movie, so is it really that important after all ? Yet another red herring maybe ? Second, connected with the whole eye thing, in the movie James is given glasses, when there is no mention in canon of his wearing them. Now, I know there are a lot of things in the movie which are not canon (groan), but it struck me as odd. It was just a silly little pointless detail, so why bother ? Maybe it was just to make him look more like Harry, or maybe JKR insisted on that bit for some reason ? Any thoughts ? From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 23:35:41 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:35:41 -0000 Subject: Will the Real Tonks Please Stand Up (was: OT...don't send Howler) In-Reply-To: <6.1c1c430a.2ce6ad2f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85035 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > > Today, a little boy began emailing me and Im-ming me He thinks I am > the *real* Tonks, and his imagination is so vivid, I cannot destroy > it for him. ...edited... > > After talking with him at great length, he gave me messages for > everyone in the WW, and was very understanding that Harry cannot use > a computer at Hogwarts. > > In fact, it all made me feel like I was a part of the WW, and it was > too much fun inventing answers to questions like 'Have you seen > Lupin lately?' and the like. > > -Tonks who is nutters. bboy_mn: Hummm... to OT or not to OT, that is the question? I think this is wonderful and can certainly see the thrill of being in this position, but I have to wonder if I'm the only person who sees a potential for disaster here? What will this kid's parents think when they find out you have been luring their innocent child into long conversations by pretending to be his favorite fictional storybook character? Yes... *I* know it's all innocent fun, but will they. Although, it may look suspicious, I would ask the kid for his parent email address and write them and let them know what is going on. Or ask him to have his parents contact you by email. Either way get them in on it. Personally, I would ask that they respond to you, before they say anything to the kids so you can get you stories coordinated. That might help cut this off with a minimum of trama to the kid, if that's the direction his parents want it to go. If they see it as a fun safe diversion, then you could continue. However, the longer you perpetuate the persona, the father it spreads. What about when the kid's friends start emailing you? What about when reality and fiction become even more blurred, and they want you to talk to Dan Radcliffe for them? What do you say when they want Ron's email address? What do you say when the kids older brother or sister tell him you are a fake? What do you do when you find out that the kids is a fat old man with a hairy back and an un-natural interest in children? Sad, that the world has come to this; sad, that innocences is no longer allowed to exist unchecked. I can see the great fun in it, but I can't help worrying about it too. Sorry to be such a downer. bboy_mn From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 23:42:38 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:42:38 -0000 Subject: ...Real Tonks ... Stand Up - Additional Note In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85036 If we continue on, we will probably have to move this to the OT group, which sadly seems to be engaged in a civil war right now. Additional Note: What other places on the internet do you use the 'Tonks' persona, and more immportantly that Tonks email address? Any adult sights? Any fan fiction sights? Any chance that there is an intersection between more adult portion of the net and that email address, intersections that would be unpleasant if a little boy were to stumble across them. If there are, I would create another Tonks identity and either move the adult stuff or the kid to the new email. Adult doesn't necessarily mean porn, but you need to evaluate whether you Tonks identity could lead to things this kid shouldn't see. These are the kinds of things we forget to think about. Again, sorry to be a downer. bboy_mn From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Fri Nov 14 23:42:18 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 18:42:18 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Will the Real Tonks Please Stand Up (was: OT...don't send... Message-ID: <4b.367a5afd.2ce6c25a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85037 Hello bboy_mn at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? Sad, that the world has come to this; sad, that ? innocences is no longer allowed to exist unchecked. I ? can see the great fun in it, but I can't help worrying ? about it too. True. But, I did 'chat' with his Mum. It was one of my first reactions. So, that has all been sorted. And, Tonks really has to go on a mission for the OoP soon. LOL. What was actually neat is that his Mum and He are so into the books. He has never seen the films. She was so interested in our discussion group, she is looking in to joining now. So, good things do come of it. She is helping me explain everything to him now. He did bring up a good question though.... How does the Ministry communicate with the Muggle world. If the WW doesn't use Muggle methods of communication, how do things get done in Muggle relations? -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mail at chartfield.net Fri Nov 14 23:43:12 2003 From: mail at chartfield.net (queen_astrofiammante) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:43:12 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85038 > Carol, who is wondering why you don't want little Mark to be important and how you can discount his age and name, which seem to me to be obvious clues to his significance. Now me: Carol, it's not that I don't want him to be important (which I think I already pointed out), just there seem to me to be so many huge ifs and buts involved in making him important. How he could possibly be Harry's sixth cousin twice removed, how the Ministry of Magic could have overlooked a wizard birth in an area as significant as Little Whinging, how two squibs, which seem to be quite rare creatures could have met and married. These things can all be explained away. But when does the point come when you put so much effort into the process of explaining them that it is simply more logical to accept the alternative - that Mark Evans could be (gasp) a red herring, or even an accident? I have no agenda - I just disagree with you. In a perfectly friendly manner, naturally. I ask you to accept that I think that it's entirely possible that we may never hear about him again, and I willingly accept that you confidently expect to meet him at the next Hogwarts sorting ceremony. One of my favourite ideas in the whole of Harry Potter fandom is mightily unpopular on sections of this list - the Perseus Evans anagram, a problem that presents all the same difficulties with wizarding families producing offspring that are notionally muggle- born and also that are possible purebloods. I'm not asking you to agree with me about that - you probably think it's a crazy idea. But wouldn't life be boring if we all agreed with each other? Imagine, if you will, a kind of Ministry of Magic-approved list of what mad theories each of us can sign up to? No, let chaos reign. With all good wishes to you and little Mark ;- )) Astrofiammante From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Fri Nov 14 23:44:27 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 18:44:27 EST Subject: What if Harry dies? Message-ID: <141.1c972138.2ce6c2db@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85039 Some recent posting made me stop and think for a while this evening as to what the reaction *would* be if Harry meets his end in book seven... or six for that matter. I thought back to all the interviews I have read and all the posts we have shared, and it hit me.... it *might* happen. In lieu of my recent post on the boy who believes, what kind of awful mess has Pottermania created if Harry were to die? I can see all the arguments that Harry will have to live in order for Voldemort to die, but JKR has never really been one for the happiest of endings. Every good thing that happens has plenty of bad come along with it. She makes it clear that in many cases there is no black and white. So pause for a moment and think, what would your reaction be? _Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Fri Nov 14 23:48:31 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 18:48:31 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: ...Real Tonks ... Stand Up - Additional Note Message-ID: <143.1c2b256e.2ce6c3cf@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85040 Just for this list, to answer your question. ;) This is strictly for this list and nothing else. To make this somewhat On Topic, lol, I have to say that I agree with what you have recently stated about JKR and her writing. I think that one of the greatest things about the books is that she does NOT allow the outside world to influence what she writes, In the Royal Albert Hall interview at Bloomsbury's site, she makes reference to this. She stands by the fact that she is in awe that people enjoy the books as they do, but that she still only writes for herself. This adds quite a bit to our mix of theories. ;) -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kcawte at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 15 08:02:27 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 00:02:27 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: My problem with teaching Harry Potter References: Message-ID: <001f01c3ab4e$cfe695e0$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 85041 Whenever I had uni classes we had to fill in anonymous reports at the end of each term (or two terms if the class lasted that long) saying what we thought of the course and how well the tutor knew the materila etc, does your uni have anything like this? because that would be the best way to go imo, I mean the class itself is obviously a lost cause already. I studied German and History and as part of the German course we had to have lectures (in English) on German history. Now the department could have made ana rrangement with the history department to teach the course but instead one of the German lecturers taught it (her only qualification to do so as far as I could tell was that she was German). She started with Napoleon as his laws and such had a lot to do with the way a German state was eventually reformed. She boiled the causes of the Napoleonic Wars down to the concept that Napoleon had some domestic problems (I think she meant riots and such rather than his wife nagging him ) so he declared war on the rest of Europe ... Which does rather ignore the fact that pretty much every time the wars began it was the rest of Europe that declared war on France and seems to gift Napoleon with the strategic sense of a gerbil. I gave up attending at that point since if she was talking rubbish about topics I already understood then she was going to confuse the heck out of me when we got to the later stuff which I didn't know. I did turn up for the last course to fill in the report though. K From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 00:01:26 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 00:01:26 -0000 Subject: Back On Topic: the Real Tonks - Magic to Muggle Communication In-Reply-To: <4b.367a5afd.2ce6c25a@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85042 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > Tonks: > > True. But, I did 'chat' with his Mum. It was one of my first > reactions. So, that has all been sorted. > > He did bring up a good question though.... > > How does the Ministry communicate with the Muggle world. If the WW > doesn't use Muggle methods of communication, how do things get done > in Muggle relations? > > -Tonks bboy_mn: Glad it work out with the kid. Too bad the world, especially the internet, has to be such a dangerous place. RE: Magic to Muggle Communication - My first instinct says, either in person or by owl. I could forsee the existance of a liason between the worlds who was responsible for receiving owls and relaying them to the appropriate parties. Someone with an obscure windowed office in the back of 10 Downing Street. I think there are people who are adept at living in both worlds. Certainly muggle and magic intermarriage must have produced some people who prefer to live their daily lives in the muggle world; running shops and business..., who would be in the perfect position to act as gateways between the muggle and magic world. Certainly, if a witch married a well educated muggle, that muggle would be an ideal candidate for liason between the worlds. Although, it is just my own personal theory, I think the are many magic and magic associate people who live in the muggle world and allow their businesses to become gateways for good and service moving between the worlds. Just a thought. bboy_mn From lmbolland at earthlink.net Sat Nov 15 00:13:30 2003 From: lmbolland at earthlink.net (goodnight_moon5) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 00:13:30 -0000 Subject: OT, but please don't send me a howler... lol In-Reply-To: <6.1c1c430a.2ce6ad2f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85043 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > I just have to share this with the list members. Some of you know my old > email was a Sirius Black address, but since I have changed over to this one. > Today, a little boy began emailing me and Im-ming me He thinks I am the *real* > Tonks, and his imagination is so vivid, I cannot destroy it for him. Tonks/Sirius-- where did he get your email address? Surely he's not on THIS list? How can you be sure he's a little boy and not a perv... or a federal agent looking for pervs. LOL. My son corresponds with Fred & George regularly via Owl Post, but it's his mother who actually answers all the mail and sends it back in the "owl transport bag - invisible to most muggles". :) Lauri From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Nov 15 00:23:40 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 00:23:40 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85044 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" wrote: > Carolyn: Now, I have followed a lot of > threads on the books site as to how important it is that both Harry > and Lily have green eyes, and that this is supposed to be a BIG CLUE > of some sort. However, it seems to have been something that JKR seems > to have let go for the movie, so is it really that important after > all ? Yet another red herring maybe ? Jen R.: Well, I'm not certain about the green color, but we do know Harry's eyes are important. Here's what JKR said in an interview in 1999, Boston Globe: "Yes. I've even drawn a picture of how they {Potters} look. Harry has his father and mother's good looks. But he has his mother's eyes and that's very important in a future book." http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/1999/1099- bostonglobe-loer.html The other important quote, was when JKR saw Harry's picture, minus his glasses, on on the Italian translation. She stated: "Don't they understand that they are the clue to his vulnerability?" http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/1200- readersdigest-boquet.htm I'm still working out my thoughts on that comment, becasue the first thought is Harry's vulnerable in his eyes, like a dragon. That leads to the Welsh Green Dragon, and the twelve uses of dragon blood and so on....Does it all mean anything? I don't know! But his eyes are important. From amani at charter.net Sat Nov 15 00:20:33 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:20:33 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizarding Genetics (WAS: Re: Mark Evans) References: Message-ID: <003f01c3ab0e$4934e140$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85045 Berit replied: > > No need to be sorry :-) > I'm aware of said quote by Madam Bones. As you say, it could be > explained :-) For instance, we don't know when a child > is "discovered" being a wizard, or when he/she is officially and > irrefutably magical.[...] > Maybe magical children aren't registered in the Ministry records > until they're, let's say 11 years old? That's when they get the > letter from Hogwarts, and that's when it would be "official" whether > they're magic or not. Maybe Hogwarts knows more about the wizard > children than the Ministry does... Just a thought :-) > > Berit Annemehr: JKR did say something about this in response to a question. As I'd just read it again last night, I actually remembered where it was! So, for anyone who's interested: >From the Scholastic chat of Feb. 2000: -------------------------------------------------------- Question: How can two Muggles have a kid with magical powers? Also how does the Ministry of Magic find out these kids have powers? JKR: It's the same as two black-haired people producing a redheaded child. Sometimes these things just happen, and no one really knows why! The Ministry of Magic doesn't find out which children are magic. In Hogwarts there's a magical quill which detects the birth of a magical child, and writes his or her name down in a large parchment book. Every year Professor McGonagall checks the book, and sends owls to the people who are turning 11. ----------------------------------------------------------- Taryn: Y'know, that brings up an interesting question of how exactly wizarding skill is transmitted from person to person. JKR seems to imply here that it's genetics, using the example of two parents with dominant genes passing recessive genes to a child--hence, two black-haired people producing a redhead and "no one knowing why." But we /do/ know why. The thing is, recessive genes /were/ recieved from someone. I would imagine (I'm not a geneticist, so I don't know *g*) that recessive genes can be transmitted for several generations without appearing. So wizarding would, obviously, have to be a recessive gene in order to pop out from "nowhere" as it does with Muggle-borns like Hermione. However, it would seem (someone correct me if I'm wrong) that most all children with ONE wizarding parent seem to get the gene, which would work more for it being dominant. And just how many Muggles HAVE the recessive gene? Because if the ALL had it, I'd imagine it would show up a lot more often. (Maybe I should stay away from that--don't want to start another thread about Wizarding numbers. Numbers never were my strong point. ^_~) And then how do SQUIBS happen? It certainly isn't realistic to believe two people with a recessive gene someone have a child with a dominant one. More impossible than unrealistic. So it actually seems that wizarding /can't/ be a genetic thing. Maybe it's more...well...magical. ^_^;; Or maybe JKR has decided to not work it out exactly positively to the letter. Or maybe I should just stop rambling about it. ^_^;; ---------- Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From darkmatter30 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 00:31:47 2003 From: darkmatter30 at yahoo.com (Richard) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 00:31:47 -0000 Subject: My problem with teaching Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <134.27c4f4b6.2ce6a04b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85046 Dear Tzvi of Brooklyn, Your experience is not entirely unusual. I've known several people who have taken assorted courses in literature, history and philosophy that should have been excellent, but for the incompetence of the professor. I've even suffered the experience a couple of times myself. One philosophy professor in particular didn't seem the least interested in several of the philosophers to be covered in the course, and so hadn't bothered trying to understand what they had written. The art of getting through the course was figuring out what the professor thought these philosophers had written, rather than what they actually had, so you could regurgitate the proper manglings for the assorted papers and tests over the course of the semester. If it had not been required for the degree plan, I would have skipped this course. As it was, several other students and I could only resort to complaints to the department head, who plead lack of resources to replace the offending professor. More intriguing was my experience in a class on Shakespeare. This was taught by the mother of one of my friends. As THIS professor professed to love Shakespeare, and had been teaching it for nearly forty years, I thought, "Well, she should know this stuff cold by now." I was wrong. She had most of the material down, but she also had some points that were ... well ... off. Not a single test passed that I did not answer at least two questions "incorrectly." There were also the daily muffs she would offer in class. Not being a shrinking violet when it comes to academics, I argued my points and won. This made for a good deal of friction between the professor and me, to the point that my friend said she could generally tell when her mother had had me in class, as her mother would come home fuming and swearing. One point I'm getting at is that a good many professors are well- intentioned enough, but not necessarily smarter or better informed on a specific topic than their students. Some are just plain incompetent. The old adage that those who can do while those who can't teach is truer than we might appreciate. Education really lies within the student, though, and if a student is intent upon an education, sometimes he or she must move beyond the limits of the available faculty in order to learn the important areas. No professor can do more than present material while trying to motivate students to be interested enough to learn it. The student has to take responsibility for his or her education, making the best of the resources at hand. For the serious scholar, there is an additional responsibility, and that is to the students, serious and otherwise, who follow. I would complain bitterly to the department head, but be certain I had a strong passing grade before doing so. A student with an A in a course is in a much better position to complain and be heard than one with a C ... or worse. I also now donate as I am able to my alma mater, in the hopes that that institution will be better able to hire qualified faculty. Richard, who took his education very seriously From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sat Nov 15 00:36:46 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:36:46 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizarding Genetics (WAS: Re: Mark Evans) Message-ID: <3c.379dfbad.2ce6cf1e@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85048 In a message dated 11/14/2003 7:30:13 PM Eastern Standard Time, amani at charter.net writes: Taryn: Y'know, that brings up an interesting question of how exactly wizarding skill is transmitted from person to person. JKR seems to imply here that it's genetics, using the example of two parents with dominant genes passing recessive genes to a child--hence, two black-haired people producing a redhead and "no one knowing why." But we /do/ know why. The thing is, recessive genes /were/ recieved from someone. I would imagine (I'm not a geneticist, so I don't know *g*) that recessive genes can be transmitted for several generations without appearing. So wizarding would, obviously, have to be a recessive gene in order to pop out from "nowhere" as it does with Muggle-borns like Hermione. However, it would seem (someone correct me if I'm wrong) that most all children with ONE wizarding parent seem to get the gene, which would work more for it being dominant. And just how many Muggles HAVE the recessive gene? Because if the ALL had it, I'd imagine it would show up a lot more often. (Maybe I should stay away from that--don't want to start another thread about Wizarding numbers. Numbers never were my strong point. ^_~) And then how do SQUIBS happen? It certainly isn't realistic to believe two people with a recessive gene someone have a child with a dominant one. More impossible than unrealistic. So it actually seems that wizarding /can't/ be a genetic thing. Maybe it's more...well...magical. ^_^;; ****************************************************************** Sherrie here: Hmmm.... :::playing with Punnet's squares::: My theory is that the Wizarding gene is a dominant mutation - that is, the allele isn't present in the "normal" genetic makeup of the parent generation, but somewhere along the line something changes on the X chromosome (has to be X-linked - otherwise, there'd be no Hermione) that enables the magical ability. The mirror, of course, would produce a Squib... Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 00:38:36 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 00:38:36 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans - Too Close for Comfort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85049 ADVERTISEMENT Weight Age Gender Female Male --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Having just caught up with the last hundred or so messages which > seemed to appear while I blinked, I have been pondering over our > friend Mark Evans and felt I could add a few thoughts. > > (1) On the question of Petunia being the only living relative, we > have looked at the possiblity of folk further over on the family > tree. ...edited... > ...edited... > > Geoff bboy_mn: I keep saying the same thing. It's clear from repeated references in the book that Harry has no other immediate relatives. Yet people keep trying to theorize some close family relation. The fatherest I've seen speculated was second cousins, but I keep saying it has to be 4th cousin or greater. That is a tracable common ancestry, but it is my no practial means considered a functional relative. To be second cousins, that would make Mark decended from Harry's grandfather's brother, Harry's great uncle (best guess, I don't understand all this 1st, 2nd, twice removed stuff). That's not distant enough. When Dumbledore looked for family, I'm sure the lack of grandparents and /other/ parental brothers and sisters was obvious. That eliminates a lot of immediate family. Great aunts and uncles as well as other aunts and uncles also seems to be missing. Why would Dumbledore look beyond that immediate family when he had Lily's sister right there in front of him. In addition, I highly doubt that Dumbledore has the entire Potter/Evans family trees commited to memory. Really would be alot of pointless trivia under the circumstances. So for all practical purposes Harry has no other immediate family besides Petunia, but it's unreasonable to think that the Potter/Evan family trees consist of two very very very skinny twigs. Certainly, the are others who are related, but not in any functional way. When we were discussing the Royal Family, and ancestry in general, someone here pointed out that they we like 3,000th in line for the throne of Britain. But, I highly doubt that the Queen has ever invited them to tea, and I seriously doubt that they are on the list of possbile guardians for Prince William and Prince Harry. They have documentd common ancestry, but for all intent and purpose are not related. If you're going to create a link between Mark and Harry, it has to be a DISTANT link. But then that's just my opinion. bboy_mn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 14 22:22:16 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 22:22:16 -0000 Subject: Goyle sen. in Azkaban? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85050 wrote: > The resent discussion about why Goyle wasn't in the DoM makes me > wonder something. Do you think they will sent him to Azkaban anyway? > He was among the Death Eaters Harry mentioned in his interview. And > now, that everyone knows he is telling the truth, they have to > believe him about Goyle sen., too, don't they? > > Hickengruendler If Goyle wasn't involved in the Ministry raid, they can't pin anything on him yet. I haven't checked this out fully, but I think that all the other DEs named by Voldermort in GoF (Avery, Macnair, Malfoy, and Crabbe) were there, along with Rookwood, the Lestranges, Dolohov and others who escaped from Azkaban. (I'm not sure where Jugson fits in; he may be one of the escapees, too, but his name doesn't ring a bell with me.) Anyway, it would appear that most if not all of LV's previously identified DEs except Goyle and Pettigrew (not counting coward Karkaroff and ex-DE Snape) were arrested after the Ministry raid. One may be in St. Mungo's being treated for a constantly transforming head, but the others are presumably in Azkaban. Voldemort is probably not ready to rescue them himself, certainly notwithout help, so he's left with Goyle and Pettigrew, who can't make a public appearance because he's reputedly dead. Enter Goyle in an invisibility cloak with the silver-footed rat formerly known as Scabbers in his pocket and a rogue dementor or two for company. . . Okay, my last paragraph is tongue in cheek, but I think dim-witted Goyle is about the only accomplice LV has left other than PP to help him rescue the prisoners. Will Draco and Crabbe, Jr., be recruited to rescue their fathers? And what about Goyle, Jr., if his father isn't in Azkaban, and Theodore Nott, who may find himself thrown in with Draco like it or not? Carol, who thinks details are important, including people who are missing from the scene P.S. Thanks for backing me up on my Theodore Nott theory, Hickengruendler. I didn't respond to that post because I didn't have anything more to add, but I do agree with everything you said. Thanks for the quotes. From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 14 23:20:29 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:20:29 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin - Stringy & Weedy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85051 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol: > Thanks. This is the quote I was looking for. Can someone please > provide a page number from the American edition, or at least a chapter > title? > Geoff: It's Chapter 26 "Seen and Unforeseen". I can't give you a US page number - it's 514 in the UK edition. From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 14 23:29:12 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:29:12 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85052 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" wrote: > Carolyn: > > Second, connected with the whole eye thing, in the movie James is > given glasses, when there is no mention in canon of his wearing them. > Now, I know there are a lot of things in the movie which are not > canon (groan), but it struck me as odd. It was just a silly little > pointless detail, so why bother ? Maybe it was just to make him look > more like Harry, or maybe JKR insisted on that bit for some reason ? Geoff: Sorry to disagree. "The tall, thin, black-haired man standing next to her put his arm around her. He wore glasses and his hair was very untidy. It stuck up at the back just like Harry's did. Harry was so close to the mirror now that his nose was nearly touching that of his reflection. 'Mum?' he whispered. 'Dad?' They just looked at him, smiling." (PS chapter "The Mirror of Erised" UK edition p. 153) Geoff From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 14 21:01:07 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 21:01:07 -0000 Subject: English Boarding Schools In-Reply-To: <147.1c93ab39.2ce65572@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85053 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, easleyweasley at a... wrote: easleyweasley: > I am a new member of the group, but have read the posts of the last few days > with interest. > > In addition, JKR sets her school in Scotland [or appears to - I can't think > of any reference in canon that specifically states this]. Traditionally, > Scottish education has been superior to English education [altho there are signs > that even this is changing], and so there tend to be fewer boarding schools in > Scotland. altho many of them are run on the same lines as their English > counterparts. > Geoff: The most recent discussion about Hogwarts being in Scotland were a dozen or so messages numbered between 83906 and 84024 which discussed this is some depth. Using a search parameter of "Hogwarts Scotland" in the Archive will probsably throw up somne of the others which have occurred. I realise as an ex-teacher in the UK that public schools normally admit at 13, as do a lot of the secondary state schools nowadays. However, as you say, Scottish education is a law unto itself; their examination system is certainly different and I'm not familiar with much of their set up. I wonder whether some of the public schools up there admit at a lower age? From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 14 23:12:05 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:12:05 -0000 Subject: My problem with teaching Harry Potter In-Reply-To: <134.27c4f4b6.2ce6a04b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85054 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, kewiromeo at a... wrote: tzvi: > Do you guys think I should take it up with the department chair? How can I > listen to a teacher who is getting fundamental facts wrong? I would prefer she > not taught Harry Potter at all. Which of course meant that I wouldn't have > taken the class. I'm not being overzealous for complaining, but these are things > that my 6 year old neighbors know. > If I were in your shoes, I would take it up with the Head of Department, backed up with a list of the factual errors which seem to show that the member of staff concerned has not researched her Harry Potter material properly. Have evidence to underline your complaint. Geoff From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 01:00:21 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 01:00:21 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: <141.1c972138.2ce6c2db@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85055 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > Some recent posting made me stop and think for a while this evening > as to what the reaction *would* be if Harry meets his end in book > seven... or six for that matter. ... what kind of awful mess has > Pottermania created if Harry were to die? > > ...edited... > > So pause for a moment and think, what would your reaction be? > > _Tonks bboy_mn: It's an expansion of what I've already said, but here is one of my older posts on this matter. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/55383 It's a pretty gloomy prediction. bboy_mn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 00:57:25 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 00:57:25 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85056 "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > (3) On the subject of accidental magic. Harry has performed this on > various occasions as we know - the hair growing, the roof, the zoo, > Aunt Marge's wineglass, Aunt Marge herself and so on. We also know > that on occasions, he has been bullied by Dudley and his sidekicks. > What triggers off this reaction? Is it just chance? Does his fear or > anger have to reach a certain point on the dial before his head of > steam blows? > > I do get a feeling that Harry is more aware of accidental magic as > time goes on: > > "Harry got through the next three days by forcing himself to think > about his 'Handbook of Do-it-Yourself Broomcare' whenever Aunt Marge > started on him. This worked quite well...." (POA p.25 UK edition) > > This implies that he has become more conscious of the possibility of > something happening. > > Geoff Yes. In the first two instances (and the boa constrictor incident where he dissolves the glass), he didn't even know he was a wizard. I suspect this is Mark Evans' situation as well. He didn't defend himself from a gang of bullies much bigger than himself (though he apparently taunted them so he's no coward), but Harry at the same age didn't defend himself, either. He spent some six hours IIRC in a tree because of Aunt Marge's dog. Harry performed wandless accidental magic in some instances but not others, all without any awareness that the strange events were magic and that he was their cause. Not sure where I'm going with this except that knowing he's a wizard makes him conscious of his potential to perform accidental magic, which makes him more responsible for it when it does happen. If he had blown up Aunt Marge at a time when the MoM hadn't thought he was in danger from Sirius Black, he probably would have been expelled. If he had somehow done it at age ten, they might not even have known about it. Carol From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Sat Nov 15 01:09:12 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 20:09:12 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: English Boarding Schools Message-ID: <1df.137682e7.2ce6d6b8@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85057 Hello gbannister10 at aol.com, In reference to your comment: ? I realise as an ex-teacher in the UK that public schools ? normally admit at 13, as do a lot of the secondary ? state schools nowadays. However, as you say, ? Scottish education is a law unto itself; their ? examination system is certainly different and I'm not ? familiar with much of their set up. I wonder whether ? some of the public schools up there admit at a lower ? age? Well, I know for a fact that Glenalmond College in Perth, Scotland admits students at 12. I would assume that Hogwarts chose 11 as the age of admission because a magical child with no proper instruction would be dangerous to himself and others. We have seen what happens to Harry when he is not in control of himself and the oddities that occurred to him before beginning at Hogwarts- ending up on rooftops when trying to escape Dudley and his bully friends, etc. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belijako at online.no Sat Nov 15 02:11:26 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 02:11:26 -0000 Subject: Goyle sen. in Azkaban? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85058 Carol wrote: > > Okay, my last paragraph is tongue in cheek, but I think dim-witted > Goyle is about the only accomplice LV has left other than PP to help > him rescue the prisoners. Me: You seem to have forgotten the proud and fierce Bellatrix ("Bella" according to Tom :-). She'll probably come in more handy than Goyle and PP put together... Berit From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com Sat Nov 15 02:32:33 2003 From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 02:32:33 -0000 Subject: (CAUTION) Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: <00de01c3aa7d$5b9aa040$fa0d3a41@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85059 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" wrote: > Iggy here: > A. > People have also been writing on the OT-Chatter group about Seamus being > portrayed as a bisexual slut in some of the recent fan-fics. Should this > matter in the long run? If any character expresses love and affection for > someone in a manner that's reciprocated, regardless of gender, who is anyone > else to say whether it's right or not. > Jeff: As the author of the original post and several others on the subject, I have to state that I have nothing against Seamus having some fun, and who he sleeps with, boy or girl is fine. I just thought it was bad enough having him be stereotyped as wanting to make rum without making him seem to be immoral. Personally, as a gay male, I'd be thrilled to see Seamus be happy with Dean or Neville. ;) So my only worry was having Seamus seem to uncaring. If he was really so randy, surely he could find a playmate in the dorm, or just close his curtain? ;) Jeff From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com Sat Nov 15 02:45:28 2003 From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 02:45:28 -0000 Subject: Which HP characters are stereotypes?, was: Re: Stereotyping In-Reply-To: <1dd.144c75e1.2ce48668@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85060 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > cheeky said: > > ? So, for the rest of you, who aren't all Draco-fans (and > ? yes, I was long before the movies. I imagined him as > ? unattractive and still thought he was marvelous.), > ? which HP characters do you think are stereotypes and > ? would you change that or not? For example, I really > ? wish Draco were more developed, but don't care about > ? Crabbe and Goyle. Which characters would you like to > ? see more of in general? Cheekyweebisom > > > > Now Me ( Tonks): > > Wow. I would love to see a slew of characters be more developed. I realise > that our main focus is Harry; however, I would love to delve more into the past > of our special friend Severus. We have seen just a twitch of time that has > made him who he is. I want to see the childhood and experiences that led our > dear, sexy Severus to be a DE and what circumstances led to him switching sides. I > want to know why he feels it a right to play favouritism in his classroom and > why he can be such a right ol' sexy git. ( Long time fan of Snape despite > his greasy hair). > > I would love to see more of Lupin to understand ( to make reference to a post > I made yesterday? or the day before) if his gentle and kind nature is borne > out of being a werewolf or if this was his child disposition. > > Flitwick, our jolly fun professor, I would like to delve more into him as a > character. > > Basically, I would like to see more of what happened B.H. ( before Harry). We > know it was dark times, but for me, at least, I would like to understand more > about what nurtured our adult characters and exactly the wrath of Mouldy > Voldy. > - Tonks > > Jeff: Well, I don't find Snape sexy, but I am very curious about what the school was like in his day. :) There are way too many questions that that little bit of Snape's worst memory raised that we need answered. Since that little chapter was first read by millions all over the world, I've seen so many posts on many groups with James- haters coming out of the woodwork. ;) I'd love to read more about what life was like for James, Lily and gang during their 7 years of schooling. Have the Weasley Twins come close to any pranks that James and Sirius did? What exactly did happen between Snape and James to cause such hatred? Did Snape ever change his undies? Why should we care? :) How about Lily and Petunia's relationship. Was Petunia hateful to Lily while she was alive, or did she store all that venom for poor Harry? I wanna know too!! ;) Jeff From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Sat Nov 15 02:31:44 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 20:31:44 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) References: Message-ID: <000f01c3ab20$9d9b2700$4dd81e43@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 85061 > Jen R.: > I'm still working out my thoughts on that comment, becasue the first > thought is Harry's vulnerable in his eyes, like a dragon. That leads > to the Welsh Green Dragon, and the twelve uses of dragon blood and > so on....Does it all mean anything? I don't know! But his eyes are > important. Iggy here: Well, old lore tells of dragons of great age that were able to change their shape, much like an animagus. Perhaps Harry's ancestry includes a Welsh Green that married / mated into the family many years ago, so Lily's bloodline to him carries a modicum of dragon blood. If you follow this theory, this (and not any transfer of power from Voldemort) may be why Harry's a parselmouth. Not because of Voldemort, but because he has Welsh Green dragon blood in him and it's power manifested in him. Just a thought... Iggy McSnurd From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 03:32:33 2003 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 03:32:33 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85062 Tonks writes: Some recent posting made me stop and think for a while this evening > > as to what the reaction *would* be if Harry meets his end in book > > seven... or six for that matter. ... what kind of awful mess has > > Pottermania created if Harry were to die? > > > > ...edited... > > > > So pause for a moment and think, what would your reaction be? > > > > _Tonks Meri here: I think that it will depend more on how he dies what people's reaction will be. Cedric and Sirius's deaths, were very sudden, and seemingly useless in the long run, and if Harry should go this way, I intend to be among the throng that freaks out over the pointlessness of it all. However, should Harry die bravely and well, sacrificing himself for the good of the world and ascending into some non-Christianized afterlife, that would be very different. And, of course he should be welcomed into the afterlife by his long lost mother, father, godfather and a slew of other adoring relatives, leaving behind him a WW at peace with itself, proud though sad friends and an at last defeated Voldemort (ala Maximus in "Gladiator", though subbing LV for Commodus). I picture myself weeping here, and not stopping for quite some time. Just my thoughts on the subject. Meri (who really really really wants Harry to live through book seven and marry Ginny) From kenneyjohn at yahoo.com.au Sat Nov 15 04:58:39 2003 From: kenneyjohn at yahoo.com.au (kenney) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 04:58:39 -0000 Subject: Ignorance and the toad Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85063 Excuse me while I display my most obvious ignorance, where in any of the books does it mention a Hogwarts choir? with toads? the leaky cauldron's shot by shot comparison to the book announces there is indeed such a choir and that it has been long awaited... I must admit, my personal interests lie in that particular field, and I'm ashamed to admit that I have over read such an important portion of the series (to myself) Can any of you enlighten me? From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 05:12:36 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 05:12:36 -0000 Subject: Goyle sen. in Azkaban? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85064 Carol wrote: > I haven't checked this out fully, but I think that all the > other DEs named by Voldermort in GoF (Avery, Macnair, Malfoy, and > Crabbe) were there, along with Rookwood, the Lestranges, Dolohov and > others who escaped from Azkaban. (I'm not sure where Jugson fits in; > he may be one of the escapees, too, but his name doesn't ring a bell > with me.) Anyway, it would appear that most if not all of LV's > previously identified DEs except Goyle and Pettigrew (not counting > coward Karkaroff and ex-DE Snape) were arrested after the Ministry > raid. Annemehr: Okay, I checked GoF and OoP. You're right, all of the previously identified DEs except Goyle, Pettigrew, and Bellatrix have been captured. I thought it might be interesting to try to estimate how many DEs LV might have left: DEs named in GoF graveyard circle but not in DoM: Wormtail Goyle DEs named in GoF graveyard appearing in DoM: Avery Malfoy Macnair Crabbe Nott Other DEs appearing in DoM: Jugson Bellatrix Rodolphus Rabastan Dolohov Rookwood Mulciber >From either GoF (pensieve scene) or OoP, we know that the last six were Azkaban escapees, but Jugson could be either an escapee or one of the graveyard DEs that LV passed in silence. Since ten DEs escaped from prison (OoP ch. 25), that means three or four escapees were not in the DoM that night. Now, my impression of the graveyard scene in GoF is that there had to have been quite a few DEs that LV passed in silence, but I hate to try to put a number on it. Still, let's see what we can come up with for the DEs still at large: 2 named DEs from the graveyard who did not participate 3 (or 4) escapees who did not participate 1 participant (Bellatrix) rescued by LV ? unnamed DEs from the graveyard who did not participate That leaves Voldemort with more than six DEs, and I would feel pretty safe assuming he has at least ten left after the DoM debacle. So he does have a few minions left -- at least half. Carol: > P.S. Thanks for backing me up on my Theodore Nott theory, > Hickengruendler. Annemehr: There's one thing I remembered about DE Nott that's interesting, though it doesn't affect Hickengruendler's theory too much. Someone once (before OoP) pointed out that in the GoF graveyard, Nott is described as a "stooped figure," which makes him sound old -- old enough to be Theodore Nott's grandfather, perhaps? Annemehr From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 05:54:30 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 05:54:30 -0000 Subject: Of course Snape is a Slytherin In-Reply-To: <3FB29B0C.8060606@pacificpuma.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85065 Jazmyn wrote: Unless you are telling me that EVERY Slytherin > child is a walking genealogy database and knows every single family down > to the poorest hedgewitch in the outskirts of Scotland? Actually, EVERY Slytherin child wouldn't have to be a database just some of them. For the record, the ones that care about such things would know the names of all the old wizarding families. There may not be that many names to memorize, in OOP, didn't Sirius say "there are hardly any of us left". By the way, Sirius appeared to be pretty well versed in wizard genealogy. Of course, he had a tapestry right in front of him with plenty of pureblood families listed. Remember, these people pride themselves on their ancestry. All purebloods may not have family trees nicely recorded on tapestries, but it's definately in a book somewhere. A book that their kids will have seen and maybe even studied. In OOP, Sirius did say that all purebloods were related. If all purebloods are related, then your family's name should be listed on the family tree of at least some of your classmates. If you're a pureblood, then at least some of the other purebloods should be your cousins. If none of the kids from old wizarding families have heard of your family, chances are you're not one of them. > If Snape told people he was pureblooded, > even if he wasn't, would a bunch of school age kids > bother to check? They wouldn't have to check. They would already know. Even if the kids didn't know their parents would. I strongly believe that *some* purebloods are so fanatical (think Mrs. Black's screeching portrait) that they would not want their kids hanging out with anyone who wasn't pure. These kids would also get asked who their friends are. The kids may not know who's pure, but their parents definately would and would tell their children exactly how pure their classmates are or aren't. Yolanda From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 04:54:38 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 04:54:38 -0000 Subject: Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Marauder's Map In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85066 hp_lexicon" wrote: > The map is called The Marauder's Map. That's singular. It refers to > one person, whomever happens to be using the map to "maraud." If it > was intended to refer to the four, it would be called The Marauders' > Map. > Steve Vander Ark > The Harry Potter Lexicon "Marauder's Map" is singular, but like you said whomever referred to it would be using it to "maraud" and would therefore be, for the moment anyway, a "Marauder". Since it is safe to assume that all four of them used the map at some point, we know that they were all "marauders" at some time. For the record, I didn't have POA with me when I posted earlier. If I had, then maybe I would have caught the fact that "Maruader's" was singular. I admit to missing that, however, I think my rationalization actually fits. Yolanda From valkyrievixen at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 06:18:36 2003 From: valkyrievixen at yahoo.com (M.Clifford) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 06:18:36 -0000 Subject: How is a Person 'Chosen' to Hear a Prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85067 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > > I used this quote in another post and was intrigued by the > part, "fell to him to arrange the boy's future." Voldemort may not > know the whole story, but assuming he does, I started thinking again about Dumbledore and the Prophecy. This seems the logical starting point for when the responsibility "fell" to Dumbledore, for he was involved in protecting Harry long before James and Lily died. > > What is the ethical responsibility of a person hearing a Prophecy? Hi Jen, I have been lurking a bit lately. Just finished my exams and need to catch up a bit. Your post has gotten me spirited though because the question you are asking is very much like a theory I was working on a while ago but I put aside during semester. I will just cut and paste in the stuff I wrote in July and perhaps it will be of interest to you. Thinking about prophecies and who is chosen to recieve them, I am starting to see a recurrence of a pattern I will tentatively name P.I. (Prophecy Instrument.) Thinking carefully about the centaur, Firenze's, comments about the wisdom of his kind coupled with his insistence that the future is not to be foretold because it has no certainty. While looking at your post in its exactness of investigation* and finally adding the 'other' prohecy as well as I can remember it to the mix. Prophecy Instrument looks something like this. (*relates to another post I was reading at the time can't remember whose it was in June.) The person who recieves the prophecy at the moment of receiving they become its instrument through which it can be fulfilled. The cannon support. Harry recieves the Voldemort ressurection prophecy alone. There is no-one else that hears it not even Trelawney. So Harry is *chosen* as the instrument. Harry's life then takes a turn to which the whole truth of the prophecy is revealed to him. Others are denied the full story. Harry essentially 'knows' enough at the time he chooses to save Peter to be liably aware that Peter may help Voldemort if he lives. I am guessing this is the universal ethic of prophecy. The Instrument must choose to do the deed with enough information to not have been blind to the consequences. He doesn't put two and two together but thats the catch really isn't it, the one DD is kicking himself over in OOTP. If you have all the information but don't make the connection bad luck. It doesn't matter to (lets call it the Fates) "the Fates" because their instrument has all the information he needs to make his own choice. So post Harry making his discovery about Peter he is given the choice to pave the prophecies way to fulfillment or end it. In this, I am also thinking that the person who overheard the first prophecy was Snape. I am seeing him as the P.I. of the first prophecy aside Dumbledore. His prescence in the shrieking shack revealed one truth to him, the Pettigrew was indeed alive. As a prophecy instrument he had a choice to pave the first prophecy or condemn it in that moment also. Interestingly, the emotions that Harry and Snape felt at that moment incited them to action in the former. And hence, the path was cleared by the instruments for the fulfillment of each prophecy. Comments are anticipated. So, as we *all* have already noted anyway, Harry was the instrument of the prophecy he heard, I have just extended it a bit and I want to add something else. Firenze insists that Centaurs do not predict the future. Is that a passive alliance of existentialism? is it why they are contemptuous of humankind who would seek to know it then control it for their own end. Do Centaurs conciously choose to avoid being the instruments of the fates by not predicting the future because they know of the Prophecy's Instrument law. Umm this is a little bit shabby as a theory, I guess. I put a lot of thought into the process but this is the first time I have written it down. Take a look anyway and tell me what you think. >From Valky From smaragdina5 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 06:21:26 2003 From: smaragdina5 at yahoo.com (smaragdina5) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 06:21:26 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans - Too Close for Comfort In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85068 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > bboy_mn: > > I keep saying the same thing. It's clear from repeated references in > the book that Harry has no other immediate relatives. Yet people keep > trying to theorize some close family relation. The fatherest I've seen > speculated was second cousins, but I keep saying it has to be 4th > cousin or greater. If say, as on some other threads here, Petunia's dad was a wizard or squib who'd married a muggle and dropped off the radar like Mrs. Figg, making Lily still a 'mudblood'and Petunia knowledgeable, that's only a second cousin. I do know of my second cousins, and sometimes am surprised to think we all came from the same great-grandparents, since we don't see each other that often and basically live separate lives geographically distant... Another thought: I was wondering why he'd be named Mark... makes me think of 'the dark lord will mark him as his equal, etc.'.. Obviously that is about Harry, but why would this Evans be Marked? smaragdina5 From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Sat Nov 15 06:23:06 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 01:23:06 EST Subject: The Whole Evans Theory Message-ID: <19d.1d0b6c44.2ce7204a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85069 Intrigued by recent posts on the Evanses and Petunia, I sat down to reread all the books tonight. That sort of makes me sound like I have no life on Friday night, which is true this week. I had remembered some things earlier, but wanted to confirm them. In the Chapter 'The Boy Who Lived', when Dumbledore and McGonagall are discussing whether or not it is wise to leave Harry with the Dursleys, DD says that they are the only family he has. In canon, wouldn't this negate any possibility of there being more Evanses or Potters out there? -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 07:29:23 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 07:29:23 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory In-Reply-To: <19d.1d0b6c44.2ce7204a@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85070 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > Intrigued by recent posts on the Evanses and Petunia, ...edited... > > In the Chapter 'The Boy Who Lived', when Dumbledore and McGonagall > are discussing whether or not it is wise to leave Harry with the > Dursleys, DD says that they are the only family he has. In canon, > wouldn't this negate any possibility of there being more Evanses or > Potters out there? > > -Tonks There are several places where the Dursley are referred to as the only family Harry has, his only remaining relatives, and assorted other phrase to the same affect. But, from a practical point of view, what are the actual chances that there is not another living person on the face of the earth who has not even so much as a single drop of Potter or Evans blood in them? You're free to see it as you will, but for me, that is as close to impossible as you can get. As, I've pointed out many times, it is reasonably logical to think that there are people on this earth who have a common ancestral link to the Potters or Evans, but that relationship is so thin and distant as to be insignificant. As a result, many of us have re-interpreted these statements as meaning Harry has no other *immediate* family. In addition, there would really be no need for Dumbledore to look deeply into either the Potter or Evans family trees because Petunia, Lily's sister, was right there in England, and was of an age, and in a situation, where it was possible for her to take care of a baby, and she was aware of the existance of the wizard world. My position is that Durleys being Harry only remaining family and Mark Evans being a very distant cousin are not irreconcilable circumstances. However, if you try to speculate any close family ties between them (Harry and Mark), you are going against multiple direct statements in the book to the contrary. Most of our speculation is based on us obsessed readers finding it odd that JKR would re-use the name Evans. I'll be the first to admit, that coming up with character names is a difficult task. Much more difficult than the average person would realize. I'm (temporarily stalled) writing an Adult HP story where I have one character named James Dunhill, and two Freds and two Sams. The name Dunhill came from a pack of cigarettes. How unoriginal was James as a name? I tried to create memebers of the Chudley Cannons who will appear at Ron's birthday party. I went through countless name and countless hours before coming up with a set of names and personalities to go with them. Not an easy task. BUT STILL, JKR is much much much much better at this than I am, and I find it hard to believe she couldn't come up with another last name. If he is just a generic kid doomed to stay in the background, then why not Mark Smith, or Mark Jones? So I conclude that this must be a significant person. The next clue is that he is 10 years old, one year short of Hogwarts. If he is insignificant, then why make him 10? Why not 9 or 12? Too big a coincidence to not be significant, if you ask me. But then, that's just my opinion. bboy_mn From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Sat Nov 15 07:43:59 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 02:43:59 EST Subject: More Questions. Message-ID: <10d.2c776e93.2ce7333f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85071 OK, so as I stated in my last post, I am rereading the series from beginning to end instead of just reading my three favourites. In PS, as Hagrid is explaining Harry's heritage in Chapter Four: The Keeper of The Keys. He tells Harry that his mum and dad were Head Boy and Head Girl. I know we only have one instance in canon- Percy that we can directly derive any fact. So, if DD made Lupin prefect for his year, why would he derail from this decision- as Lupin was appointed to try and keep a handle on his friends- and appoint James as Head Boy? Did something happen? Did Lupin tarnish his record? And, furthermore, was Lily a prefect? -Tonks, just speculating now with our OoP information [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Sat Nov 15 07:46:02 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 02:46:02 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Whole Evans Theory Message-ID: <1a1.1cf3b1b5.2ce733ba@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85072 Hello bboy_mn at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? But, from a practical point of view, what are the actual ? chances that there is not another living person on the ? face of the earth who has not even so much as a single ? drop of Potter or Evans blood in them? I do not deny the possibility of a distant relative. But still, if Petunia is Harry's 'ONLY' relative... doesn't this make for something interesting? -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From steve at hp-lexicon.org Sat Nov 15 08:09:02 2003 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 08:09:02 -0000 Subject: Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Marauder's Map In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85073 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "yolandacarroll" wrote: > > "Marauder's Map" is singular, but like you said whomever referred to > it would be using it to "maraud" and would therefore be, for the > moment anyway, a "Marauder". > Since it is safe to assume that all four of them used the map at some > point, we know that they were all "marauders" at some time. ...... > singular. I admit to missing that, however, I think my > rationalization actually fits. Not really, no. The reason fans have come up with the idea of using "The Marauders" for James and his friends is because they think of the name of the map saying "this map belongs to a specific group of people who go by the name of The Marauders." That is not what the name of the map is. So no, your rationalization doesn't fit. The fact that, when James and his friends made the map, they may have named it assuming that whomever used it would use it for marauding doesn't translate into their group having that proper name. That doesn't logically follow. However, and this is very important, I'm not trying to say that there is anything wrong with fans using that name for the group. It isn't canon, true, but it's extremely handy. I do think it's unfortunate that so many fanfiction authors who pride themselves on sticking with canon as much as possible, make this error. But it's easy to see how the error happened and quite frankly, it's a term everyone understands and is used to, so what's the harm. But it is not canon. It's a fan invention. Steve The Lexicon From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 08:57:19 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 08:57:19 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory In-Reply-To: <1a1.1cf3b1b5.2ce733ba@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85074 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > Hello bboy_mn at y..., > > In reference to your comment: > > ? But, from a practical point of view, what are the actual > ? chances that there is not another living person on the > ? face of the earth who has not even so much as a single > ? drop of Potter or Evans blood in them? > Tonks: > > I do not deny the possibility of a distant relative. But still, if > Petunia is Harry's 'ONLY' relative... doesn't this make for > something interesting? > -Tonks bboy_mn: Ok, we can approach it from that direction too. If the Potter and Evans family tree has been wiped from the face of the earth then we do with out a doubt have an interesting situation; interesting and very curious. If the ancestry is truly that bleak, then I would hope that at some point JKR would explain how it could be so. Of course, 'wiped from the face of the earth' is a little melodramatic. It is possible that if the Evans and Potters typically had very small families, had predominantly female off-springs, and that certain old bachelors in the family failed to procreate; we indeed have a set of circumstances where both the Evans and Potter family trees could be very small. There could be a variety of circumstance through which many of the branches of the family tree 'dead ended' without off-springs, like death from war, plague, etc... and it is with in the realm of very slim possibility that the Dursley truly are all that is left. But I still say that for all those circumstances to come together would be next to impossible. We need that next book! bboy_mn From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 09:11:55 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 09:11:55 -0000 Subject: More Questions. In-Reply-To: <10d.2c776e93.2ce7333f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85075 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > > > ... Hagrid ... tells Harry that his mum and dad were Head Boy and Head > Girl. I know we only have one instance (of headboy) in canon- Percy, > that we can directly derive any fact. So, if DD made Lupin prefect for > his year, why would he derail from this decision ...and appoint James > as Head Boy? > > -Tonks, just speculating now with our OoP information bboy_mn: Pure speculation, we need our Brit school experts to weigh in on this one, but I concluded that Head Boy was based on different objectives than Prefect. Headship is based on general excellences and achievement, whereas Prefectship is based on trustworthiness, maturity, and ability to command respect and obedience from the other students as well as general academic excellences. Sirius and James were the best student to ever come through the school; positively brilliant academically. So they would seem likely candidates for Headship, but they were not much on 'law and order', either adhering to it or enforcing it, so their chances of Prefectship would have been slim. In a sense, Headship is like valedictorian, whereas Prefectship is like a hall monitor and related to the functional and orderly running of the school. Logically, it would be common for overachieving Prefects to become Head Boys, but not necessarily so. Giving James Head Boy, wouldn't take away the honor of Lupin being Prefect. Certainly, we have people who have more direct experience than I do, who can confirm or deny my theory. Let's hope they weigh in. Just a thought. bboy_mn From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sat Nov 15 09:24:21 2003 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 20:24:21 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: More Questions. In-Reply-To: References: <10d.2c776e93.2ce7333f@aol.com> Message-ID: <3FB68B75.7664.10E83F4@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 85076 On 15 Nov 2003 at 9:11, Steve wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > > > > > > ... Hagrid ... tells Harry that his mum and dad were Head Boy and Head > > Girl. I know we only have one instance (of headboy) in canon- Percy, > > that we can directly derive any fact. So, if DD made Lupin prefect for > > his year, why would he derail from this decision ...and appoint James > > as Head Boy? > > > > -Tonks, just speculating now with our OoP information > > > bboy_mn: > > Pure speculation, we need our Brit school experts to weigh in on this > one, but I concluded that Head Boy was based on different objectives > than Prefect. As I've said before, every school does this differently (and anyone who wants to see the material on prefects I mentioned the other day - which looked at the office of Prefect in certain British style schools in Australia, please just e-mail me). Nobody can say entirely how Hogwarts does this - but what Steve describes here is certainly possible - at some schools, the criteria for a Prefect and a Head Boy girl are similar - at others they may be different. > Headship is based on general excellences and achievement, whereas > Prefectship is based on trustworthiness, maturity, and ability to > command respect and obedience from the other students as well as > general academic excellences. My view - and I have no real evidence for this, it's just something I think works is that at Hogwarts, Prefects are appointed by the Head of House - they may very well consult with the Headmaster (and I am certain they would) but as prefect primarily seems to be a House office at Hogwarts, I would say the major part of the decision should be in the hands of the Head of House - perhaps subject to the Headmaster's approval. The only thing against this I can see is Dumbledore's statement to Harry "You may, perhaps, have wondered why I never chose you as a prefect?" But even this may just indicate the Dumbledore was involved in the decision in the way I describe. OTOH, Head Boy/Head Girl are *school* offices. So that may be in the hands of the Headmaster - in fact it should be (about the only other alternative I can see is an election). Now, under this system - it would not be at all uncommon for a person to have qualities that lead them to be selected as Head Boy or Head Girl, and to be selected as a Prefect - but nor would it be impossible for that not to always be the case. > Sirius and James were the best student to ever come through the > school; positively brilliant academically. So they would seem likely > candidates for Headship, but they were not much on 'law and order', > either adhering to it or enforcing it, so their chances of Prefectship > would have been slim. > > In a sense, Headship is like valedictorian, whereas Prefectship is > like a hall monitor and related to the functional and orderly running > of the school. Personally, I doubt that the position of Head Boy or Head Girl is like a Valedictorian - academic achievement is probably fairly important but I'd be surprised if its the primary criteria. The primary criteria to be a Head Boy or Head Girl would most likely be something like leadership potential. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Sat Nov 15 09:43:48 2003 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 09:43:48 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85077 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > BUT STILL, JKR is much much much much better at this than I am, and I > find it hard to believe she couldn't come up with another last name. > If he is just a generic kid doomed to stay in the background, then why > not Mark Smith, or Mark Jones? So I conclude that this must be a > significant person. > > The next clue is that he is 10 years old, one year short of Hogwarts. > If he is insignificant, then why make him 10? Why not 9 or 12? > > Too big a coincidence to not be significant, if you ask me. > > But then, that's just my opinion. > Another thing that makes me think he is significant, besides his last name, is his first name. The scar on Harry's head, in a very real sense, is 'Evans mark', that is, the mark from Lily Evans sacrifice. And this kid is named Mark Evans. Something is up... --Arcum From silver_owl_01 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 04:08:22 2003 From: silver_owl_01 at yahoo.com (silver_owl_01) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 04:08:22 -0000 Subject: Fudge and the Daily Prophet Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85078 I just reread GoF and I noticed something a little odd. How come Fudge is able to force the Daily Prophet to change it's editorial line to attack Harry and Dumbledore in OotP but he can't stop them from taring him and the MoM a new one over the Quiddich Cup debacle? I seriously doubt Rita is the only reporter that likes to embarass the MoM so, why the change in attitude? Rita Skeeter kept going after them and Fudge seemed very frustrated about not being able to do anything about it. But in OotP he has them fall in line. Did he had the power to this all along and just needed to grow a backbone to use it, or did he changed the laws to give him that power? Does anybody have any theory about this? I just doesn't seem to make sense to me. Silver Owl From groups at e-dennis.net Sat Nov 15 06:32:04 2003 From: groups at e-dennis.net (groups at e-dennis.net) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 01:32:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: stereotyping Molly Weasley and male/female role models In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85079 > Now Hermowninny: > I believe what you both have said to be true, however, I don't think > it's the whole truth.? I have 3 daughters, and they don't like books > with a female lead. > > I have given them countless books that showcase young girls, and they > simply aren't interested.? I read every book my kids do before I will > let them read it and even I didn't enjoy the ones with a female lead > as much as those with a male lead. > > We have even read several books where the lead characters are a duo- > boy and girl--equal and complementary in capabilites and "screen > time".? Still, we all identified with (and liked) the boy more. > > When I discovered this, I was alarmed.? Does this point to some > stereotype in my mind that has been passed on to my daughters, or are > there just no good books out there with a female lead? > > Perhaps it's only natural for girls/women to look to boys/men to be > their hero.? (Please only throw fruit, no daggers!) I think they happens when an author begins their book with the wrong goal in mind. Instead of, "I'm going to come up with the best possible book I can," they think, "I'm going to come up with a book with a female lead." I think this is focusing on the wrong goal from the off, and I, like you, find it shows up in some writer's work from time to time. Instead of fruit or daggers, might I be so bold as to throw a couple of books I enjoyed *with* female leads, "Anne of Green Gables" and anything from the "Little House on the Prairie" series. Oldies but goodies. *g* -Dennis Who was teased in school for reading these 'girly' books. From screaming_veela at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 07:55:48 2003 From: screaming_veela at yahoo.com (lauralexis) Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 23:55:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) Message-ID: <20031115075548.19108.qmail@web20207.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85080 Iggy said: Well, old lore tells of dragons of great age that were able to change their shape, much like an animagus. Perhaps Harry's ancestry includes a Welsh Green that married / mated into the family many years ago, so Lily's bloodline to him carries a modicum of dragon blood. I say: This would also explain why the AK didn't kill him. Like we saw in GoF, dragons are hard to jinx/curse/hex/etc. If Harry did have dragon blood in him, Voldie's curse wouldn't have worked. Of course, Harry has been jinxed before, and felt the full effects, ie: Imperius Curse, which he was quite adept at throwing off. Perhaps it only works if he is in mortal danger? Even Crouch!Moody wouldn't have made Harry jump out a window in front of the entire class, so he was reasonably safe then... This is getting quite circular; sorry. :p Iggy said: If you follow this theory, this (and not any transfer of power from Voldemort) may be why Harry's a parselmouth. Not because of Voldemort, but because he has Welsh Green dragon blood in him and it's power manifested in him. I say: Is there any relationship between snakes and dragons? They may both be reptiles - or reptilian, not sure exactly where one would class a dragon - but other than that I don't see a link between Harry's being a parselmouth and possible dragon lineage. The theory intrigues me, however. -lauralexis (as there seems to already be about four Lauras on the list already!) From abigailnus at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 13:49:00 2003 From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 13:49:00 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85081 Tonks asked the very important question: > > ... Hagrid ... tells Harry that his mum and dad were Head Boy and Head > > Girl. I know we only have one instance (of headboy) in canon- Percy, > > that we can directly derive any fact. So, if DD made Lupin prefect for > > his year, why would he derail from this decision ...and appoint James > > as Head Boy? And Steve suggests: > Pure speculation, we need our Brit school experts to weigh in on this > one, but I concluded that Head Boy was based on different objectives > than Prefect. > > Headship is based on general excellences and achievement, whereas > Prefectship is based on trustworthiness, maturity, and ability to > command respect and obedience from the other students as well as > general academic excellences. > In a sense, Headship is like valedictorian, whereas Prefectship is > like a hall monitor and related to the functional and orderly running > of the school. I'm not sure I can agree. We've seen plenty of instances in which the Head Boy is seen to be just as much of an administrative job as Prefect. Percy's behavior when he himself is Head Boy is consistent with this, as is Dumbledore's statement at the beginning of PoA that he expects his new Head Boy and Girl to help keep the school in line while Sirius is on the loose and Dementors are patrolling the streets of Hogsmeade. For that matter, later in PoA, Harry overhears Percy is reporting to Dumbledore as if he were part of the Hogwarts chain of command (this is when Sirius is spotted in the school and the students are camping in the great hall), which as I understand the role of prefects and heads in British boarding schools, is pretty accurate. I do find, however, that the question of why James was made Head Boy as opposed to Lupin is an intriguing one. We know from Sirius that when the prefect badges were handed out, both he and James were considered too wild to have one. Whether or not Headship is an academic distinction, I find it hard to believe that it would be bestowed on a trouble-maker - if that were the case, why didn't Fred or George become Head Boy? They're both prodigiously talented wizards, as we can see from their ingenious methods of resistance at the end of OOP. No, I believe that at some point between handing out the prefect badges and selecting a Head Boy in James and Lupin's year, James went through a transformation of character. We already know this happened. I'm not sure if it's canon that James and Lily were already dating by their seventh year, but they married soon after leaving Hogwarts, which makes it quite likely. Sirius also tells Harry that by the end of James' stay at Hogwarts, his treatment of Snape was purely defensive as opposed to the bullying we see when he's 15. In other words, James grows up. He goes from being someone who needs to be calmed down by his best friend, to someone who can be trusted to calm other students. Which leaves us with the question of why Lupin wasn't made Head Boy, even if James was a good candidate. I don't necessarily believe that the HB is selected solely from among the prefects. Molly's statement that becoming a prefect is the first step to Head Boy-hood could be interpreted either way. She could mean that, having been a prefect, Ron would be well-placed to draw attention to himself as a candidate for HB, or that becoming a prefect is the first qualification, but Ron will still have to compete with the other three male prefects of his year for the job. Either way, there can be no doubt that Lupin should have been in the running. So why wasn't he chosen? I think it all comes down to the Prank. It's a pretty common perception that the changes in James' character have a lot to do with the Prank. He saw that his teasing and bullying were having real consequences, and that a man could have died, and this shook him up. I also believe that there were repercussions for the other Marauders involved. In the SS, Lupin says that Snape was sworn to secrecy because if he had spoken, Lupin, who was innocent in all things, would have been expelled. In a previous post (#78512), I wrote that Snape might have felt betrayed by this lack of punishment. I suggested that he would have seen it as a hypocritical action by Dumbledore, who claimed to be impartial but was in fact playing favorites. What if Dumbledore realized that this was how it might look to Snape - and, in order to appease him, stripped Lupin of prefect's badge, or at least swung the vote against him when it came time to choose a Head Boy? The Prank, in my opinion, was a pivotal moment in the lives of all the Marauders, and, of course, in Snape's (as I wrote in my post, I believe that it was Snape's perception that Dumbledore was playing favorites that helped to drive him into Voldemort's arms). It was the beginning of adulthood for James. It was the end of his carefree existence, and the first of many major screw-ups for Sirius. We don't know how Peter was involved, although there are several theories floating around here. For Lupin, I suspect, it was the point at which his treatment as a normal, trustworthy person ended. I think that we can draw a straight line from the Prank and Lupin's being passed over for Head Boy to Sirius' decision to choose Peter as a secret keeper over Lupin. From that point on, I think the people closest to him looked at Lupin and thought "Well, he's a good guy, but there's that werewolf thing...". I don't think that perception dies until Sirius admits his mistake in the SS. Abigail Marking, with this post, her 100th post to HPfGU. Of course, that took me nearly two years, and I'm responding to Steve who, I believe, reached 100 posts in something like two weeks, but it's still a pretty big day. From abigailnus at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 14:01:04 2003 From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 14:01:04 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: OT Posts to OT-Chatter, Movie Posts to Movie Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85082 Greetings from Hexquarters! Just a quick reminder that off-topic posts (entertaining as they are!) are not permitted on this list. We require that posts to the main list make a canon point and discuss the words or works of JKR. Discussing a teacher's incompetence in teaching PS, or the fact that a young correspondent believes you to be a character from the books do not fall under that category. We have an entire HPFGU-OTChatter list for off-topic posts. It's a fun and friendly place where people enjoy talking about all sorts of things, and it can be found at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter By the same token, questions about the new movie or its trailer should go to our sister movie group at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Movie For further information, check out our posting guidelines at www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin/ Thanks! Abigail aka Bookish Elf for the list admin team From rredordead at aol.com Sat Nov 15 15:01:42 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:01:42 -0000 Subject: Which character would you like to see more of? (was Which HP characters..) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85083 > cheeky said: Which characters would you like to > see more of in general? > Tonks wrote: our special friend Severus. We have seen just a twitch of time > that has made him who he is. I want to see the childhood and experiences I want to know why he feels it a right to play favouritism in his classroom and why he can be such a right ol' sexy git. > I would love to see more of Lupin to understand if his gentle and kind nature is borne out of being a werewolf or if this was his child disposition. Jeff: > Well, I don't find Snape sexy, but I am very curious about what > the school was like in his day. :) There are way too many questions > I'd love to read more about what life was like for James, Lily and gang during their 7 years of schooling. Have the Weasley Twins come close to any pranks that James and Sirius did? What exactly did happen between Snape and James to cause such hatred? Did Snape ever change his undies? Why should we care? :) How about Lily and Petunia's relationship. I wanna know too!! ;) Now Me: Without question: Lucius Malfoy and Bellatrix Lestrange. Friends or foe? Who really is Lord Voldemort's right-hand man or woman? What were they like in school? Did Lucius father buy him a spot on the quiditch team? And was Bella head girl? What type of maniacal, sadistic, crazy behavior did they both indulge in as rich, spoiled and beautiful 17 year olds? Did they torture small animals, and/or 'accidentally' kill any of their early dates? And did they get away with it? Truly dysfunctional or misunderstood? Mandy, not expecting any real answers to these very silly questions. From rredordead at aol.com Sat Nov 15 15:23:07 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:23:07 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory In-Reply-To: <19d.1d0b6c44.2ce7204a@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85084 nymphadoraotonks wrote: > In the Chapter 'The Boy Who Lived', when Dumbledore and McGonagall are discussing whether or not it is wise to leave Harry with the Dursleys, DD says that they are the only family he has. In canon, wouldn't this negate any possibility of there being more Evanses or Potters out there? Now me: Yes that is very true. But do you believe Dumbledore? I don't, not anymore. Certainly, DD is not lying to hurt Harry but I believe he is deceiving him to protect him, stretching the truth. After all DD has a lot riding on Harry Potter and has to protect him until the boy is old and ready enough to fulfill his destiny, whatever that my be. Now as far as Mark Evans being a relative? I don't buy it. Evans if the most common of welsh names. So is Mark. But it does seem like a big coincidence especially in a book whose author who puts so much research into the names of her characters. We know JKR picked that name for a reason, but I believe that reason is a big fat red herring. From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Sat Nov 15 15:37:03 2003 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:37:03 -0000 Subject: Fudge and the Daily Prophet In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85085 --- "silver_owl_01" wrote: > I just reread GoF and I noticed something a little odd. > > How come Fudge is able to force the Daily Prophet to change it's > editorial line to attack Harry and Dumbledore in OotP but he can't > stop them from taring him and the MoM a new one over the Quiddich > Cup debacle? I seriously doubt Rita is the only reporter that > likes to embarass the MoM so, why the change in attitude? > ... But in OotP he has them fall in line. Did he had the power > to this all along and just needed to grow a backbone to > use it, or did he changed the laws to give him that power? The change to the Daily Prophet happened after the 3rd task in GoF. - Rita had disappeared and didn't submit a story to the paper. - A student was dead. (The son of a MoM worker, well known to anyone with magical creatures - which is all the WW) - Harry, the Daily Prophet favorite for the TriWizard Tournament, was somehow connected with Cedric's death. - After the 3rd task, they found out Barty Couch had died and Mad Eyed Moody had been kidnapped. - and if all that wasn't enough for the respected paper, Harry came back rambling (for he had no proof) that everyone's worse fears had been realized ... Voldemort was back! If the Daily Prophet wasn't sure what line to take, Fudge was willing to take the lead role in giving interviews and calming fears. With Dumbledore winning greater influence in some circles, Fudge was protective of his leadership role in the face of a man amassing an army. With the support (in Galleons) from a traditional family, Fudge followed the line Malfoy fed him. Just a theory ... what do others say? ~aussie~ From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Sat Nov 15 15:48:44 2003 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:48:44 -0000 Subject: Ignorance and the toad In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85086 --- "kenney" wrote: > Excuse me while I display my most obvious ignorance, where in any > of the books does it mention a Hogwarts choir? with toads? the > leaky cauldron's shot by shot comparison to the book announces > there is indeed such a choir and that it has been long awaited... > > I must admit, my personal interests lie in that particular field, > and I'm ashamed to admit that I have over read such an important > portion of the series (to myself) > > Can any of you enlighten me? Choirs? Hmmmm Nothing in PS/SS Nothing in CoS Nothing in PoA ... but GoF ... Meanwhile Fleur Delacour was criticizing the Hogwarts decorations to Roger Davies. "Zis is nothing," she said dismissively, looking around at the sparkling walls of the Great Hall. "At ze Palace of Beauxbatons, ... And we 'ave CHOIRS OF WOOD NYMPHS, 'oo serenade us as we eat. Also, there was a CHOIR of merpeople in the 2nd task to welcome the champions. ~aussie~ From Zarleycat at aol.com Sat Nov 15 15:48:35 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 15:48:35 -0000 Subject: Slytherin MWPP In-Reply-To: <001301c3aa94$41cecee0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85087 "Kathryn Cawte" wrote: You know one of the arguments for James and/or Sirius not being Slytherins > is that they were probably all the same house, but what if they were *all* > Slytherins? Peter, certainly, comes across as being cunning (and possibly > ambitious, hanging with the big shots all the time) rather than brave, Remus > has a deep dark secret and certainly seems a little cunning to be able to > protect it so well, Sirius is a pureblood of the type that Slytherin seemed > to love, certainly cast in the same mould as the Malfoys and we assume James > to be a pureblood - he's certainly ambitious enough, being an arrogant show > off, big shot quidditch player and no slouch academically either for that > matter. The 'not a witch or wizard that went bad that wasn't in a Slytherin' > comment could be a form of double bluff, we're supposed to find out about > Peter and thing, ah, that's all exaggeration, that stuff about Slytherins > because we assume Peter is a gryffindor but he actually turns out to be a > Slytherin all along .... I'm leaning more and more to MWPP all being in Slytherin. There is certainly support for James being a Gryff, but JKR has not explicitly said so. The interview question where she was asked whether James was a Seeker for Gryffindor just like Harry (paraphrasing here) and her response was "He was a Chaser" can be interpreted either way. Sirius tells us that Snape was a part of a group of Slytherins, most of whom became DEs. That can be interpreted as saying that Snape hung with a group of Slyths that was different from the MWPP group of Slyths. Okay, here's my first prediction for future books. We'll find out that Snape and MWPP were all Slyths in the same year. Snape was odd man out because he more firmly believed in the whole pure-blood superiority thing. Thus he was alienated from his dormmates, J,S,R, and P. However, he was taken in by some of the other, older Slyths including Lucius and the Black cousins, who, in turn despised Sirius, for not buying into the blood purity ideal. They also wouldn't like James, Remus or Peter, but could tolerate James to a certain extent because of his Quidditch talents. The scene is set for a 7 year intra- house battle between MWPP and many of the other Slyths. This can also tie in with the victimized Snape we see in OoP. By the time they're in their fifth year, Snape's older allies like Lucius and Bellatrix have left Hogwarts. He is now more vulnerable to a joint attack by Sirius and James. Of course, this warped, little theory doesn't take into account that if the 5 were all in the same year, Snape risked being hexed into oblivion every time he went to sleep at night. And, if they were in the same house and Snape wanted the teachers to catch MWPP out-of-bounds at night, all he would have to do is wait until they went out and then alert a teacher to wait for them at the entrance to the common room. Random thoughts by someone who needs more coffee... Marianne From rusalka at ix.netcom.com Sat Nov 15 16:08:15 2003 From: rusalka at ix.netcom.com (marinafrants) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 16:08:15 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85088 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > BUT STILL, JKR is much much much much better at this than I am, and I > find it hard to believe she couldn't come up with another last name. > If he is just a generic kid doomed to stay in the background, then why > not Mark Smith, or Mark Jones? So I conclude that this must be a > significant person. Something else just occured to me as I think about this -- before OOP, Lily's last name had not actually been explicitly stated in the books, had it? If I remember correctly, JKR had said in an interview that Lily's maiden name was Evans, and that was the only canon we had. So not only did OOP introduce Mark Evans, it also officially introduced Lily's full name for the first time. After all, regardless of what she'd said in interviews, there was nothing preventing JKR from having James scribble "Lily Smith" on his exam paper in the Pensieve scene. So I'm becoming more convinced than ever that JKR deliberately gave Mark and Lily the same name. And given how carefully she names her characters, I'm sure she didn't do it just to have a funny coincidence in the books. Marina rusalka at ix.netcom.com From rredordead at aol.com Sat Nov 15 16:18:11 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 16:18:11 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85089 > Tonks asked the very important question: > ... Hagrid ... tells Harry that his mum and dad were Head Boy and Head Girl. I know we only have one instance (of headboy) in canon- Percy,> that we can directly derive any fact. So, if DD made Lupin prefect for> his year, why would he derail from this decision ...and appoint James > as Head Boy? > And Steve suggests: > Pure speculation, we need our Brit school experts to weigh in on this one, but I concluded that Head Boy was based on different objectives than Prefect. Headship is based on general excellences and achievement, whereas > Prefectship is based on trustworthiness, maturity, and ability to > command respect and obedience from the other students as well as > general academic excellences. > > In a sense, Headship is like valedictorian, whereas Prefectship is > like a hall monitor and related to the functional and orderly running > of the school. Abigail said: > I'm not sure I can agree. We've seen plenty of instances in which the Head Boy is seen to be just as much of an administrative job as Prefect. Percy's behavior when he himself is Head Boy is consistent with this, Snip> Now me: I believe you are both partially correct. The key work for the Headship in my school was Leadership. Head boy and Head girl were considered figureheads for the school and prized for their leadership qualities most of all. Their role was to lead the school to excellence through example. I.e. Hardwork, adherence to rules, discipline, responsibility, confidence, respect and compassion. However, having said this, it doesn't seem to fit with Percy's personality, who I do not consider to be an effective leader of people. Ambitious and hard working, yes. But a true leader, no. I am inclined to believe perhaps DD thought that the position might help him to develop his leadership qualities. Abigail again: > I do find, however, that the question of why James was made Head Boy as opposed to Lupin is an intriguing one. I think it all comes down to the Prank. The Prank, in my opinion, was a pivotal moment in the lives of all the Marauders, and, of course, in Snape's. Now me: It comes down to the Leadership qualities I mentioned above. Lupin again, like Percy is not a leader. James and Sirius were. Lupin was and is hardworking, fiercely loyal, dependable, loving, kind, generous... the list goes on, but he is not capable as leader of others. He is too much of an outcast for that ever to be possible. Not all of us can lead and power comes from many different sources. As for why James was picked over Sirius, I think had to do with the prank. As you state above Abigail, the prank was a turning point in all their lives. Sirius showed he was capable of inflicting real damage on another human and James was ultimately the better man and better leader by backing out of the prank at the end by turning from his friends to save his enemy It is hard to define what makes a Head girl or boy. The decision of course rests in the headmaster. But I could go through and tell you who I think were or should have been Heads in their day. James was definitely head boy material, as was Lily. Arthur is not Head material although Molly is. Lucius Malfoy is Head boy material, dangerously so, but Bellatrix is not.(Bella is a leader but far to unabashedly psychotic for any headmaster to responsibly give her that job.) Hermione and Harry both embody the qualities for Headship but Ron does not. (Although he might grow into it.) Cedric Diggory definitely head boy material. I can't remember if he was or not? None of the Dursleys are. Dumbledore and McGonagall are, Snape is not. Ginny Weasley definitely head girl material but I would have said Percy was not, so ultimately who knows? Mandy. Who congratulates Abigail on her 200th post. A true fan. From rusalka at ix.netcom.com Sat Nov 15 16:20:04 2003 From: rusalka at ix.netcom.com (marinafrants) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 16:20:04 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85090 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" wrote: > Which leaves us with the question of why Lupin wasn't made Head Boy, even if > James was a good candidate. I don't necessarily believe that the HB is selected > solely from among the prefects. Either way, there can be no doubt that Lupin should have been in > the running. So why wasn't he chosen? > > I think it all comes down to the Prank. The Prank may have something to do with it, but I think there's another factor to consider: if the scene in the Pensieve is any indication, Lupin did a lousy job as Prefect. Dumbledore gave him the job in the hope that Lupin would keep James and Sirius in line, and Lupin completely failed to do so. So if later James improved of his own accord, either because of the Prank or for some other reason, I can easily see Dumbledore deciding that he'd be better Head Boy material. James, even in his arrogant bully days, appeared to have leadership qualities -- he could get people to pay attention to him and to do as he said. Remus didn't develop these qualities until later in life. Marina rusalka at ix.netcom.com From ear at scn.org Sat Nov 15 07:10:36 2003 From: ear at scn.org (Emily Anne Rude) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 07:10:36 -0000 Subject: questions about HP (Evans?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85091 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" wrote: > So we keep taking statements *logically* when we should be thinking > *magically*. ~I completely agree. So many little things (and big things) are being examined altogether too logically. It's the Potterverse, for crying out loud! (Apologies to Severus for calling it the potterverse...bad kune, bad kune..) > [If you have a copy of CoS which says 'ancestor', it's an official > mistake. It should read 'descendant'.] ~Thank you kindly. > Similarly, for the purposes of the protection spell: > as far as I can work out, Dumbledore needed someone who > > a) knew they were related to Lily > b) knew what a spell was > c) could consent to the spell. > > So Dudley simply doesn't count. ~yup yup. > They don't exist. Magically, that is. When you're setting up the > spell, you don't consider them, so they have no *effective* > existence. > > So Dumbledore can happily talk about Petunia as Lily's only > remaining relative, even though we know (from our logical viewpoint) > that Petunia *wasn't* the only remaining relative. To Dumbledore's > mind, Dudley couldn't seal the charm, and so he doesn't exist. ~I consider that as quite important... > > Agatha Christie has her detective Miss Marple frequently remark that > she never believes what people *say*. Unless there is objective > evidence to back it up, don't believe it. > > Same applies in the Potterverse, IMO. Don't believe what people > *say*. > > Firstly, there's the possibility that they're lying. > > Secondly, there's also the possibility that what you think they mean > and what they think they mean are not the same thing at all. > > Pip!Squeak ~thank you thank you for that marvelous post- may I add that unless you trust *someone* (Ddore) then you will be quite frustrated indeed. I have heard some nasty things about Ddore being somehow evil- which of course I simply don't believe. (now watch, he'll end up killing Harry or something) But, really, you can't be paranoid *all* the time. note- I'm really really brand new to this group so if I did something dreadfully wrong please don't get angry ... I didn't include the whole text in my reply- is that bad? From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Sat Nov 15 15:52:28 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 09:52:28 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Fudge and the Daily Prophet References: Message-ID: <006e01c3ab90$79fefc20$77f21d43@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 85092 > Silver Owl > > Did he > have the power to this all along and just needed to grow a backbone to > use it, or did he changed the laws to give him that power? > > Does anybody have any theory about this? I just doesn't seem to make > sense to me. > Iggy here: He probably looked at what happened in GoF regarding the MoM and initiated the "Censorship Decree #3" that requires the editors of the Daily Prophet to pass any articles referencing the MoM in any way past Fudge or an appointed assistant for approval before printing. ("Censorship Decree #1" was probably in regard to the Muggle World, and "Censorship Decree #2" was most likely in regard to Voldemort.) Just a theory Iggy McSnurd From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 15 07:41:53 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 07:41:53 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85093 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: Tonks: > > Some recent posting made me stop and think for a while this evening > > as to what the reaction *would* be if Harry meets his end in book > > seven... or six for that matter. ... what kind of awful mess has > > Pottermania created if Harry were to die? > > > > ...edited... > > > > So pause for a moment and think, what would your reaction be? Geoff: (1) I would throw the book across the room! (2) This raises an interesting point. If the story is seen from Harry's POV, does the book come to a full stop at that point? I suppose we would go into epilogue mode or something similar. It was bad enough when Frodo felt he couldn't continue in Middle earth and took ship to Valinor...... From Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk Sat Nov 15 16:35:59 2003 From: Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk (Robert Shaw) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 16:35:59 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizarding Genetics References: <3c.379dfbad.2ce6cf1e@aol.com> Message-ID: <45eb01c3ab97$232cb610$749c87d9@robertft56e9wi> No: HPFGUIDX 85094 MadameSSnape at aol.com wrote: > Taryn wrote > Y'know, that brings up an interesting question of how exactly > wizarding skill is transmitted from person to person. JKR seems to > imply here that it's genetics, using the example of two parents with > dominant genes passing recessive genes to a child--hence, two > black-haired people producing a redhead and "no one knowing why." > Sherrie wrote: > > Hmmm.... :::playing with Punnet's squares::: My theory is that the > Wizarding gene is a dominant mutation - that is, the allele isn't > present in the "normal" genetic makeup of the parent generation, but > somewhere along the line something changes on the X chromosome (has > to be X-linked - otherwise, there'd be no Hermione) that enables the > magical ability. Punnet squares are an idealisation. Genetics is often a lot more complex than that. I can think of three other options, all with real world precedent. First option. The magic gene could be a segregation distorter. There are many genes known which cheat. They actively interfere with various stages of reproduction to make themselves more likely to be inherited. E.g suppose muggle fetuses are killed by their intimate exposure to magic when their witch mother cast a spell, or use a potion, during pregnancy. (Alternatively eggs/sperm that don't carry the magic gene get killed whenever a spell is cast. There are several other variants on this theme.) Then witches would only be able to have magical children, apart from a few rare cases where a mutation protect the muggle from magical side effects (i.e squibs.) In this case we'd expect a low fertility rate in wizard-muggle marriages. Second option. There are environmental factors. The ability to learn to read is genetic. Virtually all humans have the right genes for it, no chimps do. However not everyone who can learn to read does. Similarly the magic gene might give the potential to learn magic *if the environment is right.* The Hogwarts quill shows that the environment has no influence after birth (either that or its very good at divination) but there are nine months before birth. Suppose that having two copies of the magic isn't enough to be a wizard, you must also be exposed to a sufficient level of magic while still in the womb, when the brain is being formed. In effect, the magic gene would need a jump start from outside. Then the magic gene can be very common, conceivably to the point where over 90% of muggles have one copy and 80% have two, and yet we can still have only one muggle-born in 10,000 or less. Wizards don't normally cast spells on pregnant muggles, and they keep all muggles away from magic so most of the people with two magic genes wouldn't get the necessary pre-natal exposure to magic, and their magic genes would never switch on. In this case virtually all children of wizard-witch marriages would have magic, apart from a few mutations/squibs. Wizard-muggle marriages could have 80-90% wizard children (same as the frequency of the gene in the general population) since whether the mother was witch or muggle the wizard parent would be using enough magic near the fetus to trigger the magic gene. Some of you should now be asking how the whole thing started. The first wizard can't have had their magic triggered by the spells of their parent. Well, humans aren't the only users of magic, and the genetics may be different in different species. A close encounter with a unicorn or dragon while pregnant could be enough to kick start the child's magic. Third option. There might be hundreds of genes involved. Suppose there is a set of 30 genes, each of which can say magic or muggle; some recessive, some dominant. You only get to be a wizard if at least 20 say magic. Wizard-witch marriages will produce magical children, unless they are unlucky with the draw. In wizard-muggle marriage the wizard parent will contribute over two-thirds magical genes. Provided the frequency of these genes in the muggle population is reasonably high, the muggle parent will throw enough in to produce mostly magical children. In a muggle-muggle marriage the odds are strongly against enough recessive magic genes matching up, even if they are quite frequent. This option too would produce the observed pattern. These three options aren't mutually exclusive either. Maybe magic needs both the right prenatal environment and the cooperation of a few dozen genes. -- Robert From Malady579 at hotmail.com Sat Nov 15 17:20:16 2003 From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 17:20:16 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85095 Tonks asked: >Some recent posting made me stop and think for a while this evening >as to what the reaction *would* be if Harry meets his end in book >seven...or six for that matter. ...what kind of awful mess has >Pottermania created if Harry were to die? > >So pause for a moment and think, what would your reaction be? Geoff wrote: >(1) I would throw the book across the room! Really? Did you do that when others died? See, if JKR wants to kill Harry I expect it to be very well done. In fact, so well done I will be frozen over the book, not breathing, barely blinking processing it all. For me, Harry is well primed to die right now. He has been isolated well from the other students and brought into the melancholy "save-the-world" hero mode. Well illustrated when he ignored the end-of-year feast. Harry is not normal anymore. He is marked by ethereal ways (ok, it's a glass globe with a prophecy), which really will screw, with his mind. He's now not a 15 year old boy with an annoying dark lord wanting to kill him. He is a prophesized, mark boy who sees how he has been groomed to destroy this evil personally. He is waking up to a world built to make him able to win this battle. Of course, this may not be true and the prophecy might have meant someone else, but in Harry reality, Dumbledore very clearly has made his world the way he perceives it. If it turns out Harry is not the correct boy, he still has to deal with the reality of all this. So, killing Harry seems gracious to me almost. To me, he will never be normal. Geoff: > (2) This raises an interesting point. If the story is seen from > Harry's POV, does the book come to a full stop at that point? I > suppose we would go into epilogue mode or something similar. Nah. In PS/SS, it started out of Harry's perspective and went out of Harry's perspective again in the start of GoF. So I guess, I agree that the bulk of the story will be in Harry's perspective, but in the case of his death, it will switch to generic narrator and end in epilogue. Geoff: > It was bad enough when Frodo felt he couldn't continue in Middle > earth and took ship to Valinor...... And that is how I see Harry. It is so hard for me to sit on my hands with Matrix: Revolutions comparisons, but I true want Harry to be the same kind of hero. Kind of daft. In his own world or reality. But the right one that can save everything if he only trust himself, his advisors (even Snape), and his intuition. Melody From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sat Nov 15 17:41:12 2003 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 17:41:12 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85096 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > Geoff: > Sorry to disagree. > > "The tall, thin, black-haired man standing next to her put his arm > around her. He wore glasses and his hair was very untidy. It stuck up > at the back just like Harry's did. > > Harry was so close to the mirror now that his nose was nearly > touching that of his reflection. > > 'Mum?' he whispered. 'Dad?' > > They just looked at him, smiling." > > (PS chapter "The Mirror of Erised" UK edition p. 153) > > Geoff Carolyn: Thanks Geoff, I missed that one ! So, just we're left with the puzzle over Harry's green eyes. Jen Reese has again pointed out the canon for them apparently being important, so maybe its just something JKR could not influence in the movie. From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 15 17:58:06 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 17:58:06 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85097 Abigail wrote: > > > Which leaves us with the question of why Lupin wasn't made Head Boy, even if James was a good candidate. I don't necessarily believe that the HB is selected solely from among the prefects. Either way, there can be no doubt that Lupin should have been in the running. So why wasn't he chosen? > > > > I think it all comes down to the Prank. << Marina: > > The Prank may have something to do with it, but I think there's > another factor to consider: if the scene in the Pensieve is any indication, Lupin did a lousy job as Prefect. Dumbledore gave him the job in the hope that Lupin would keep James and Sirius in line, and Lupin completely failed to do so. So if later James improved of his own accord, either because of the Prank or for some other reason, I can easily see Dumbledore deciding that he'd be better Head Boy material. > > James, even in his arrogant bully days, appeared to have leadership qualities -- he could get people to pay attention to him and to do as he said. Remus didn't develop these qualities until later in life.<< Ah, but Lupin had leadership qualities too. I don't think any one would deny that he has excellent people skills. He says he led his friends to become Animagi. And maybe that's his guilt talking, but it still shows that he's always considered himself a leader. Lupin is just not a team player, or rather the only team he's ever loyal to is Team Lupin. He doesn't seem to consider that he owes anything to the Hogwarts administration which made him a prefect. He *could* have done something to keep his friends in line, even Sirius says so. He never even tried. We can see the same thing happening in PoA. It's Lupin's duty as a teacher to report what he knows about Sirius, turn in the Marauder's map, not expose a fellow teacher to ridicule, and not take sides in a Quidditch match. He fails consistently. Pippin From rusalka at ix.netcom.com Sat Nov 15 18:19:29 2003 From: rusalka at ix.netcom.com (marinafrants) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 18:19:29 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85098 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Marina: > > > > The Prank may have something to do with it, but I think there's > > another factor to consider: if the scene in the Pensieve is any > indication, Lupin did a lousy job as Prefect. > > James, even in his arrogant bully days, appeared to have > leadership qualities -- he could get people to pay attention to > him and to do as he said. Remus didn't develop these qualities > until later in life.<< > > Ah, but Lupin had leadership qualities too. I don't think any one > would deny that he has excellent people skills. He says he led > his friends to become Animagi. And maybe that's his guilt > talking, but it still shows that he's always considered himself a > leader. Lupin has leadership qualities *now*. Whether he had them in his school days is debatable, but if he had them and chose not to exercise them, it still constitutes him doing a lousy job as prefect. Either way, more than enough grounds for Dumbledore not to make him head boy. Marina rusalka at ix.netcom.com From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 18:20:46 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 18:20:46 -0000 Subject: Fudge and the Daily Prophet In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85099 silver_owl_01 wrote: > > I just reread GoF and I noticed something a little odd. > > > > How come Fudge is able to force the Daily Prophet to change it's > > editorial line to attack Harry and Dumbledore in OotP but he can't > > stop them from taring him and the MoM a new one over the Quiddich > > Cup debacle? aussie: > The change to the Daily Prophet happened after the 3rd task in GoF. > - Rita had disappeared and didn't submit a story to the paper. Annemehr: I think that's your main reason right there. Rita, who had been very hard on the MoM, suddenly disappears. The Daily Prophet don't know that Hermione had captured her, and they wouldn't believe it if someone had told them, anyway. Maybe they were worried that Fudge had something to do with silencing her -- and I mean by power of his position, not by kidnap or murder or anything like that. They may have believed that he "had something on her" and blackmailed her into silence. The only other person with real power that Rita had attacked was Dumbledore, and he doesn't seem to have ever given them any reason to fear him. I do agree that Lucius Malfoy had a lot to do with how all this worked out, and the Daily Prophet would be only too happy to continue the line Rita had begun in bashing Harry and Dumbledore. Annemehr From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Nov 15 18:47:34 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 18:47:34 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85100 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "marinafrants" wrote: > The Prank may have something to do with it, but I think there's > another factor to consider: if the scene in the Pensieve is any > indication, Lupin did a lousy job as Prefect. Dumbledore gave him > the job in the hope that Lupin would keep James and Sirius in line, > and Lupin completely failed to do so. Jen R.: I've always wondered if this is the real reason Lupin was given the prefect job, or just Lupin's interpretation. Dumbledore would know by Lupin's fifth year that his influence over James and Sirius was minimal, given all the detentions Sirius mentions he and James were in. Could it have been a vote of confidence from Dumbledore? Shacklebolt wonders later in the chapter why DD didn't do this for Harry: It would've shown confidence in him. It's what I'd have done." (OOTP, US, chap. 9, p. 172) There might be a history of Dumbledore choosing prefects to show other students the person deserves an honor. Kind of like Ron, come to think of it. His accomplishment in many other student's eyes is "friend of Harry" just as Lupin's would have been "friend of James/Sirius". Dumbledore may be pointing out these people deserve a second look for more subtle accomplishments. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Nov 15 18:53:08 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 18:53:08 +0000 Subject: Replay Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85101 Being moderately idle and disorganised I always have a stack of unlabeled used video tapes, so I often have to zip through them to see if there is anything worth saving. This afternoon it was time for another sort out. Slot the tape, press 'play' and this came up: J.P. : Are we going to discover in Book 5 , why, for example, Voldemort has such an animus for Harry's parents? JKR : Yes. A straight-forward question and a very definite answer. No hesitation, no qualification. Never really noticed this snippet before. (In case you don't recognise it, it's from the Paxman interview broadcast just before the release of OoP.) Have we discovered the reason for the animus? Have I missed something? OK, we know that James and Lily defied Voldy three times, or so the terms of the prophecy implies, but would this be sufficient reason for such a strong term as animus? After all, we don't know how they defied him and under what circumstances. All very vague, off-hand and indirect. Animus would indicate something much more direct and personal, IMO. Can anybody see what I can't? Kneasy From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat Nov 15 18:59:14 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 18:59:14 -0000 Subject: Goyle sen. in Azkaban? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85102 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > If Goyle wasn't involved in the Ministry raid, they can't pin anything > on him yet. But he was at Voldemort's rebirth at the graveyard. Harry saw him there and he mentioned Goyle's name in the interview. Now, that everybody knows Harry was telling the truth, wouldn't it be logical to arrest Goyle as well? Harry is a witness, that should be enough to get Goyle. Hickengruendler From grahadh at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 14:03:48 2003 From: grahadh at yahoo.com (grahadh) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 14:03:48 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: <20031115075548.19108.qmail@web20207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85103 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, lauralexis < screaming_veela at y...> wrote: > Iggy said: > Well, old lore tells of dragons of great age that were able to change their > shape, much like an animagus. Perhaps Harry's ancestry includes a Welsh > Green that married / mated into the family many years ago, so Lily's > bloodline to him carries a modicum of dragon blood. > > Lauralexis said: > This would also explain why the AK didn't kill him. Like we saw in GoF, dragons are hard to jinx/curse/hex/etc. If Harry did have dragon blood in him, Voldie's curse wouldn't have worked. > Now me: Following that logic, the AK curse wouldn't have worked on Lilly either. It was an interesting idea, but I still think it was Lilly's sacrifice, and not her green eyes, that saved Harry's life. :-) -D.G. From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 19:04:58 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 19:04:58 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85104 Didn't we just touch on this subject in OTC recently? Oh, well, I'm ready to weigh in again! Melody wrote: > See, if JKR wants to kill Harry I expect it to be very well done. In > fact, so well done I will be frozen over the book, not breathing, > barely blinking processing it all. > > For me, Harry is well primed to die right now. He has been isolated > well from the other students and brought into the melancholy > "save-the-world" hero mode. Well illustrated when he ignored the > end-of-year feast. Harry is not normal anymore. > So, killing Harry seems gracious to me almost. To me, he will never > be normal. Annemehr: Well, I agree with everything you said *except* that killing Harry would be gracious. Okay, first and most importantly, I do want JKR to write the story she always meant to. But that understood, I don't want Harry to die. I don't see that having been set apart and having suffered so much already would necessarily make life not worth living. So what if he never quite has a "normal" life; does that necessarily mean he could never have a good one? As we read, we understand more and more that Harry has lived a life bounded by and crushed under the evil of Voldemort. I would really like to see him get out from under that and live before he dies. He's never had that before, and goodness knows he's earned it. If all his peace and rest are to come after his death, of course that's still good, but it would put it beyond where we could follow -- and I for one would like to experience some of it with him, in black and white, on the page. Besides, this low point we are left in with Harry now is two books from the end (though quite possibly as little as a book and a half from Voldemort's end). There is time for Harry to become more than only the "marked man" whose only purpose is to stop the Dark Lord. So, I do see that it may be true that Harry will have to sacrifice himself. And it will be a very great sacrifice for all concerned (us included). It could be a very profound and glorious ending. I'll trust JKR for it, either way. I just hope I don't get my heart broken. Annemehr "I am /not/ going to be murdered," Harry said out loud. "That's the spirit, dear," said his mirror sleepily. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat Nov 15 19:09:11 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 19:09:11 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85105 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith wrote: > > J.P. : Are we going to discover in Book 5 , why, for example, > Voldemort has such an animus for > Harry's parents? > > JKR : Yes. > < snip> > > Have we discovered the reason for the animus? I think JKR meant the prophecy. Voldemort has such an animus towards Lily and James, because they were the ones who protect Harry. He wanted to kill Harry, therefore Harry's protectors/ parents are in the way. They were also a part of the OOtP, which should also be a reason why they were killed. Hickengruendler From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Nov 15 19:18:19 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 19:18:19 -0000 Subject: Mad-Eye showing Harry the Photo/Caradoc Dearborn Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85106 I was re-reading "Mrs. Weasley's Woes" last night and wondered why Moody was so insistent to show Harry that photo of the original Order, and then why Harry felt Mad-Eye was watching him all the way up to the boggart incident. Any ideas? Is he trying to show Harry about the danger involved, make a point that all those people were alive one day and gone the next? (Foreshadowing for Sirius's death perhaps). That just doesn't seem like a picture you pull out at a party, even a party with some of the same guests as in the picture. "Oh, look at all our friends who were murdered." Also, Mad-Eye mentioned "Caradoc Dearborn, vanished six months after this, we never found his body..." (US, Chap. 9, p. 174). It seems like if Voldemort captured Order members to get intelligence info, there would be more people in the Order mentioned as "disappeared" rather than murdered. In a post from August, Ffred Clegg mentioned Dearborn's name is Welsh--perhaps he was an order defector and had something to do with the Potter's death? Not much to go on, really. Jen, guilty of meandering thoughts today ;). From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Nov 15 19:47:20 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 19:47:20 +0000 Subject: Endings Message-ID: <86AEF35E-17A4-11D8-B255-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85108 What do we want? To know how it ends, of course. Well, in the fullness of time, that is. I for one want to read it in Harry Potter and the Thingy of Whatsit, not have it served up in isolation. That doesn't stop me getting into the guessing games, though; even if somebody does get it right, we probably wouldn't know for sure before-hand. Preferences for the ending vary depending on the opacity of one's rose-tinted spectacles. Some see Harry (plus partner) romping off into a golden-hazed future; the meadows ablaze with wild flowers, bluebirds twittering overhead, into a truly magical sunset with everything perfection. Those steeped in the lore of folklore appreciate that there are damn few epics where everybody lives happily ever after. With alarming frequency the one person who doesn't get to enjoy a ripe old age is the hero. He gets a holiday named after him instead (and wasn't that mentioned at the beginning of PS/SS? Hmm. Harry Potter Day. I wonder). Others, more cynical, suspect that JKR may not tie up all the loose ends as promised. After all, a sequel or two might not be a total disaster, right? Just for a moment, let's put aside analyses of the plot, fascinating as they are, and consider HP from a slightly different angle. Is it possible that the genesis of of Harry Potter could be an influence on the ending? We all know the place; a train between London and Scotland. We all know the circumstances; mother of a young child and times aren't easy. We all know that the story appeared almost miraculously complete - the end was known at the beginning. We all know that international stardom was not envisaged. JKR hoped to sell a few thousand copies, enough to supplement her income - a local story for a local audience. We all know she is not going to change the plot just to please her audience. We all know that JKR is quiet, reserved, almost introverted, definitely not the extrovert optimist type. We all know JKR claims to be brutal; kill 'em off if necessary. So, what would be your odds for a happy ending? All in all, the circumstances of his genesis do not hold out a great deal of hope - particularly the train journey; in the UK they are so bad they generally promote rage and an inclination to kill, *kill*, KILL! I think it's thumbs down for Harry; 3:1 he doesn't make it. Kneasy From rusalka at ix.netcom.com Sat Nov 15 19:49:57 2003 From: rusalka at ix.netcom.com (marinafrants) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 19:49:57 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85109 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: (Regarding Lupin becoming prefect) > Could it have been a vote of confidence from Dumbledore? Shacklebolt > wonders later in the chapter why DD didn't do this for Harry: It > would've shown confidence in him. It's what I'd have done." (OOTP, > US, chap. 9, p. 172) There might be a history of Dumbledore choosing > prefects to show other students the person deserves an honor. Kind > of like Ron, come to think of it. His accomplishment in many other > student's eyes is "friend of Harry" just as Lupin's would have > been "friend of James/Sirius". Dumbledore may be pointing out these > people deserve a second look for more subtle accomplishments. But in Lupin's case, the last he needed was people giving him a second look. His whole existence at Hogwarts depended on keeping a huge and difficult-to-conceal secret. Drawing other people's attention too much was not just uncomfortable or undesirable for him, it was dangerous. And what would've been the point, really? To combat prejudice against werewolves? Since nobody was supposed to know Lupin was a werewolf, showcasing his accomplilshments would not have achieved it. Ron's elevation to Prefect is, at least in theory, a personal benefit for Ron. Lupin's would've done nothing for him, or for the persecuted group he belongs to. Marina rusalka at ix.netcom.com From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Sat Nov 15 19:56:35 2003 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 19:56:35 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85110 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, > > Iggy said: > > Well, old lore tells of dragons of great age that were able to change their > > shape, much like an animagus. Perhaps Harry's ancestry includes a Welsh > > Green that married / mated into the family many years ago, so Lily's > > bloodline to him carries a modicum of dragon blood. > > > > Lauralexis said: > > This would also explain why the AK didn't kill him. Like we saw in GoF, > dragons are hard to jinx/curse/hex/etc. If Harry did have dragon blood in him, > Voldie's curse wouldn't have worked. The dragons in Rowling, as opposed to the dragons in (say) Wagner, Tolkien or McCaffrey, are not depicted as being overly bright. Magical, dangerous, deadly, yes, but possessed of a rather dinosaur- like sensibility. Newt Scamander's classic text indicates that dragons are accurately classified as "beasts" rather than "beings." If a dragon were to present itself as an Animagi ancestor (as opposed to an Animagi ancestor who could assume the form of a dragon), that would strike me as a rather abrupt departure from Canon. - CMC (tickling a sleeping controversy) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Nov 15 20:13:19 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 20:13:19 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85111 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > > For the first time (but perhaps not the last), I'm actually going to > agree with you, Kneasy. The 'defied three times' is *amazingly* > evocative, but with absolutely nothing else given it's more than a > little hollow at present. I have my prophetic doubts, as well. One > wonders: what is/was the status of the Potter family, given that > James had money and didn't need to work? What were the two of them > engaged in (more specifically than OotP members) that got them in the > line of fire three times? Very frustrating to get all these leads > without the kind of structural fill-in that gives them depth. I > suspect OotP will be more gratifying to me with whatever comes after > it bracketing it. > > And hey, Kneasy, any time you're in my area, I'd be happy to buy the > beers and sit down for a nice, long argument... :) > > -Nora Is that a relief. Thought for a minute I'd slipped a cog or two and had forgotten some key part of the plot. Hickengruendler (85105) suggests that Voldy was driven by the Potters protection of his nemesis. But did he know for sure that Harry was his target? I don't believe so, after all even DD wasn't certain at the time. You know, I've had the most ridiculous idea running through my head for the past few weeks. Where did the Potter's fortune come from? Inherited from the Riddles perhaps? A rich family and Voldy couldn't inherit under UK law. No evidence, just this crazy idea I can't get out of my head that Harry is related to Voldemort. Under these circumstances 'defiance' need not necessarily be associated with the Order. Marriage, maybe? OK, don't all laugh at once. And Nora, I argue for *hours* and need lots of beer. Kneasy From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat Nov 15 20:23:06 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 20:23:06 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85113 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: . > > Hickengruendler (85105) suggests that Voldy was driven by the > Potters protection of his nemesis. But did he know for sure that Harry > was his target? I don't believe so, after all even DD wasn't certain at > the time. I don't think that really matters. If I were Voldeort, I would have tried to kill Harry and Neville. Therefore the Potters and the Longbottoms were both on his "to die" list. But maybe Frank and ALice longbottom had a trustworthy secret keeper, therefore he had the chance to go to the Potters first. Hickengruendler From abigailnus at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 20:37:36 2003 From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 20:37:36 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Leadership (was: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85114 Pippin wrote: > Ah, but Lupin had leadership qualities too. I don't think any one > would deny that he has excellent people skills. He says he led > his friends to become Animagi. And maybe that's his guilt > talking, but it still shows that he's always considered himself a > leader. I agree that Lupin exhibits leadership skills, although I think Marina is right when she points out that these are a relatively recent development. In fact, I think Lupin grows quite a bit between the Pensieve scene and the present. It's just that his growth isn't as overt as James'. In the intervening years, Lupin gains self-confidence. Whereas in the past, he prefers to look away when people are doing something wrong, in PoA he feels comfortable enough to encourage Neville to make fun of his fear of Snape, and to berate Harry sternly for sneaking off to Hogsmeade. True, these are baby steps - he never works up the courage to confront Snape directly about Neville, and he never tells Dumbledore about the fact that Sirius is an animagus. Lupin deeply dislikes confrontation, whether it's with people he cares about such as Sirius or people he dislikes such as Snape. Am I the only person who find this quality familiar? Lupin's emotions are extremely hard to read. He always behaves with great civility, but it's hard to discern his actual feelings beneath his veneer of cordiality. Even in moments of great distress, such as the SS or right after Sirius' death, he keeps his head, speaking in a soft voice and counseling reason. He always argues for the path of understanding and discourse, is prepared to make friends of his enemies, and takes an interest in the socially disenfranchised. Does this soound like anybody we know? Obviously, there are some key differences between Lupin and Dumbledore. Lupin started out as a principled boy who nevertheless allowed his friends to drag him into mischief and mayhem, out of a desire to avoid confrontation and keep their affections. Lupin the man had outgrown that willingness to be dragged into bad situations, but remains wary of confrontation. He holds firm to his own opinions, but prefers not to voice them in public when he knows that he might have an unsympathetic audience. He hasn't yet reached the place where Dumbledore is, in which he remains the nicest, friendliest guy you ever met, who will nevertheless hold fast to what he believes and never let you get past him as long as you disagree with. And at the same time he'll assure you that your every right to disagree with him. And he'll smile while he's doing it. I don't know if Lupin is ever going to get to that point, but I believe that, of all the members of the Order, he's the closest to it. Which brings me to a question that's been on my mind for a while. Assuming that Dumbledore will die before the final battle, which is not at all unlikely, who will lead the order? I don't believe it'll be Harry, unless Dumbledore dies in close proximity to the final battle. In that case, the order will need a general, not a leader (and we all know how I feel about Dumbledore's skills in that department, anyway) and it's possible that Harry will be able to fill that role. But let's assume that Dumbledore will die earlier - in book 6 or nearer to the beginning of book 7. The Order will need someone to rally them back to the cause, raise their spirits, and get them back on the job of fighting Voldemort. Unfortunately, because of Harry's exclusion from the Order in OOP, we know next to nothing about the organizational structure of the order, including whether there's a second in command. According to the HP Lexicon, these are the current members of the Order (that we know of): Diggle, Dedalus Doge, Elphias Dumbledore, Aberforth Figg, Arabella Doreen Fletcher, Mundungus "Dung" Hagrid, Rubeus Jones, Hestia Lupin, Remus J. McGonagall, Minerva Moody, Alastor "Mad-Eye" Podmore, Sturgis Shacklebolt, Kingsley Snape, Severus Tonks, Nymphadora Vance, Emmeline Weasley, Arthur Weasley, Bill Weasley, Charlie Weasley, Molly I think we can assume that any candidate for the leadership of the Order will be someone we know reasonably well. That means Hagrid, Lupin, McGonagall, Moody, Snape, or any of the Weasleys (I'm not considering Kingsley Shacklebolt or Tonks, because despite being colorful characters we know next to nothing about them). Snape, we can assume, is out for a myriad of reasons. Hagrid is unqualified. The Weasley boys are too young and inexperienced, and Molly simply isn't appropriate (sorry, all you guys discussing JKR's female characters, but you know I'm right). That leaves us with Arthur Weasley, Minerva McGonagall, Alastor Moody and Remus Lupin. Arthur is not a bad suggestion. He seems less in awe of Dumbledore then other members. Of all members of the order, I get the feeling that Arthur is the one who came to Dumbledore's way of thinking in his own way and of his own volition, as opposed to being taught by Dumbledore. He and Molly weren't members of the Old Crowd, which is probably why he brings a more adult atmosphere to the group - less hero-worship. For this very reason, however, he might not be appropriate. He isn't an old-timer, and he doesn't understand the interpersonal dynamics as well as the other members. In fact, he doesn't seem interested in them. While Dumbledore keeps abreast of the unpleasantness between Sirius and Snape, Arthur is completely clueless. This might work against him as a possible leader. Also, he's a very straightforward man. I don't see Arthur instigating a campaign of spying, for example. Basically, I see Arthur as a very good top lieutenant, possibly even a second in command, but not necessarily a leader. McGonagall, in my opinion, is out. I know that she got a lot more interesting in OOP, but she still feels like an outsider in the order. She's not a fantastic fighter, and several references are made to her age and frailty. Plus, I think Dumbledore intentionally leaves McGonagall away from the true core of the order because he wants at least on member of the top trio to be focused on Hogwarts. These days, Dumbledore is leading the order, and Snape has spying on his mind. Dumbledore may simply want McGonagall to be the school's fallback in case he and Snape get too swallowed up by order business, or are killed in action. Moody may seem like an obvious choice, but I think he's totally wrong for the job. If Dumbledore is a strategist, Moody is a tactician. Unlike Dumbledore, he truly is a good general. He's the guy you want planning your battles and training your troops, but as for making policy decisions, considering intelligence, and being in charge of morale, he's completely unsuited. Not to mention that his ideology is a far cry from Dumbledore's. Which leaves us with Lupin. Again, I don't think he's there yet, but of all the members of the Order, Lupin is most likely to turn out like Dumbledore. I believe that if Dumbledore does snuff it, Lupin will end up leading the order - for one thing, he'll probably be the only guy not running around like a chicken with its head cut off. I don't believe he'll be a perfect fit right away, but I think he'll grow into the job. Abigail From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Nov 15 20:48:56 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 20:48:56 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85115 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: > > I don't think that really matters. If I were Voldeort, I would have > tried to kill Harry and Neville. Therefore the Potters and the > Longbottoms were both on his "to die" list. But maybe Frank and ALice > longbottom had a trustworthy secret keeper, therefore he had the > chance to go to the Potters first. Jen R: As Dumbledore said, "he {Voldie) chose the boy he thought most likely to be a danger to him...he chose, not the pureblood, but the half-blood like himself." (OOTP, US, chap. 37, p. 842), so the Prophecy alone could lead to the 'animus' described in the interview- --Voldie decided Harry was the "One with the Power" and the Potters were his barrier to killing the boy. I tend to think it also has to do with the Potters in general (as Nora mentioned), their defiance as pure-bloods who oppose Voldie. Perhaps even having a child at all, a Potter heir, was considered 'definace' by Voldie. This is tangential, but I've been curious about the Longbottom secret keeper. Did they give up their secret keeper once Voldie was presumed dead, and that's how Bella and Company found them? Or did they have an unreliable secret keeper...perhaps even Caradoc Dearborn who gave up their secret and then disappeared?!? (Sorry--I just have Dearborn on the brain today, wondering about his purpose). From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 21:24:18 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 21:24:18 -0000 Subject: Which character would you like to see more of? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85116 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > > cheeky said: > Which characters would you like to > > see more of in general? > > > Tonks wrote: > our special friend Severus. ... I would love to see more of > Lupin to understand > > Jeff: > > I'd love to read more about what life was like for James, > Lily and gang during their 7 years of schooling. ... How about Lily > and Petunia's relationship. I wanna know too!! ;) > > > Now Me (ghinghapuss): > Without question: Lucius Malfoy and Bellatrix Lestrange. > ...edited... > > Mandy, bboy_mn: Most of the characters I'm interested in, I'm confident we are and will find our more about. Neville - I've alway been a big Neville fan, and never believed that stumbling bumbling persona for a second. I'm convinced (without evidence) that there is an even deeper connection between Harry and Neville than we have seen do far. I often suspected that Harry may have had some role in causing Neville's parent to be tortured. I speculated that Harry and Hargid spent the missing 24 hours at Neville's place, and that lead the DE's to seek out Mr.&Mrs. Longbottom for information. Snape - I think we have seen the seeds planted for Snape and Harry to develop a grudging respect for each other. Harry already said that he never in his life expected to feel sorry for Snape, yet he did. I think this theme will be expanded as a way of Harry getting to know more about his parents and their friends, and you can't learn about them at school without Severus coming into play. Draco - I think to some extent Draco is about to undergo a developemental change as dramatic as Ginny's. Draco has to come more to the forefront. He simple can't remain the school bully and tease. He has a personal vendetta against Harry now. It's no longer playtime at school; it's war. So I'm convinced we will see deeper into Draco life and personality. Hermione and Parents - I don't think it will happen, but I wwould love to see Harry and Ron (and perhaps Hagrid) drop by the Granger's for tea one day. Now that would be a scene with some potential. Neville's Gran - A scene with equal potential to the Granger's, would be the gang dropping by Neville's house for tea, or even better yet, a birthday party for Neville. It would be the perfect opportunity for the gang to put Granny straight about her brave and heroic grandson. About time she quite ragging on him. It would also be the perfect time for Gran to reveal that deeper connection between Harry and Neville that I talked about. Lupin and Lupin's Mum - I want to find out more about Lupin's life, and in the process, I want to meet his Mum. I suspect she is a most extrodinary lady, and is chiefly responsible for making sure that Lupin accomplish something with his life, rather than lay around drunk and feeling sorry for himself. Certainly, there are more, but with only two books left, we certainly won't be able to get to them all. Just a thought. bboy_mn From quigonginger at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 21:35:33 2003 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 21:35:33 -0000 Subject: Fudge and the Daily Prophet In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85117 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "silver_owl_01" wrote: > I just reread GoF and I noticed something a little odd. > > How come Fudge is able to force the Daily Prophet to change it's > editorial line to attack Harry and Dumbledore in OotP but he can't > stop them from tearing him and the MoM a new one over the Quiddich Cup > debacle? I seriously doubt Rita is the only reporter that likes to > embarass the MoM so, why the change in attitude? Rita Skeeter kept > going after them and Fudge seemed very frustrated about not being able > to do anything about it. But in OotP he has them fall in line. Did he > had the power to this all along and just needed to grow a backbone to > use it, or did he changed the laws to give him that power? > > Does anybody have any theory about this? I just doesn't seem to make > sense to me. > > Silver Owl Ginger weighs in: I've read some good responses, esp. those referring to "Deep Pockets" Malfoy, but my first impression was that this is how papers run. Harry found this out in GoF. Rita's first story was about the great tragic little hero, and then he was the nutter (Gone a bit off on me, hasn't she?) If you read Muggle tabloids, and I admit I only know of those in the States, you see it quite a bit. Just look at any series of stories about the Royal Family. They go from saint to sinner and back again on a whim. Give them a bigger fish to fillet and off they go. As long as the MoM was the biggest shish to kebob, they went in skewer after skewer, but as soon as Harry gave his "unbelievable" story, the MoM was small potatoes. Sure, they had Rita's lead to follow. They had seen that anything with Harry sold like hotcakes. Now that they know that Harry is telling the truth, the MoM will be back on the front burner. Fudge will have egg on his face, and the Prophet will conveniently forget that they went along with it. By the time people get bored Harry being the Golden Boy, someone will come up with something to discredit him again, and off they'll go with the next hunk of bologna until he does something brave, and then he'll be the toast of the WW again. Repeat ad nauseum. Of course, it could be a conspiracy. That would be much more interesting. Anyone care to tread that path? Ginger, who is getting hungry From rredordead at aol.com Sat Nov 15 21:45:08 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 21:45:08 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85118 Melody wrote: > And that is how I see Harry. It is so hard for me to sit on my hands with Matrix: Revolutions comparisons, but I true want Harry to be the same kind of hero. Kind of daft. In his own world or reality. But > the right one that can save everything if he only trust himself, his > advisors (even Snape), and his intuition. Now me: I'm right there with you Melody. For the entire last 20 min of Matrix Revolutions I'm sitting there thinking, "That's what's going to happen to Harry." "That's what's going to happen to Harry." Over and over again. I can't really seeing it ending any other way. But, of course, that is how JKR wants us to see it right now and she has a genius for manipulation. I can tell you in every book she's guided me exactly where she wants me to go, has me thinking Harry's thoughts a split second before he speaks them and when I put that realization along with her hint's in interviews about him possibly not surviving, and the definite end of the saga at book 7, she most definitely wants us to believe, that at least for now, he is going to die. Personally though, although I'd be very sad, I'd applaud her guts for carrying it off though. She'd have many angery fans out there. Just look at the ruckus killing Sirius made. Mandy From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 15 21:45:12 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 21:45:12 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Leadership (was: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85119 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" wrote: > Lupin's emotions are extremely hard to read. He always behaves with great civility, but it's hard to discern his actual feelings beneath his veneer of cordiality. Even in moments of great distress, such as the SS or right after Sirius' death, he keeps his head, speaking in a soft voice and counseling reason. He always argues for the path of understanding and discourse, is prepared to make friends of his enemies, and takes an interest in the socially disenfranchised. > > Does this soound like anybody we know? Yeah. You Know Who. Voldemort had a veneer of cordiality when he was at Hogwarts. Everybody trusted him. Takes an interest in Giants and Goblins, he does. Speaks for the path of reason, at least in public, so that people like the Blacks didn't know how far he was prepared to go behind the scenes. But where, tell me, does Lupin take an interest in making friends with his enemies? He reaches out to Ron after Ron calls him a werewolf, but I'd hardly call Ron an enemy. Snape and Pettigrew are Lupin's enemies. I don't see him reaching out to them. It would certainly be an interesting development if ESE!Lupin became head of the Order, I'll grant you that. Pippin From mundungus42 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 21:49:03 2003 From: mundungus42 at yahoo.com (Right Honorable) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 21:49:03 -0000 Subject: Ignorance and the toad In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85120 >where in any of the books does it mention a Hogwarts choir? with >toads? the leaky cauldron's shot by shot comparison to the book >announces there is indeed such a choir and that it has been long >awaited... I believe the description of "long awaited" is facetious, since there have not been any Hogwarts choruses, much less ones carrying giant toads, in canon. I think it's scandalous that there hasn't been any organized student music at Hogwarts beyond one singing of the school song in PS/SS and "Weasley is Our King." This is the first film departure from canon that I wholeheartedly applaud. Er, I should probably shut up now since this is veering dangerously off topic. I'm away laughing on a fast camel, Mun42 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 20:40:42 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 20:40:42 -0000 Subject: Scabbers/Percy AGAIN, AGAIN!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85122 Arcum wrote: Or possibly, since he found Scabbers. Wormtail could have placed Percy under Imperio at any time from when he was 5 to PoA, as well as in GoF... Carol (edited by Nineve): I don't think that Scabbers/Pettigrew could do magic in his rat form, with or without a wand. (Note that PP uses Voldemort's wand to kill Cedric; he appears to have lost his own.) Scabbers does little except sleep until Crookshanks senses his disguise. Nineve responded: Sorry, but I don't think we should justify Percy's behavior at all. As DD says himself, every family has a "bad one", including his. Percy is not evil, but highly misguided. I had doubts about him and his relationship with Scabbers before, and I actually started this discussion, but I got a beautiful insight reply by someone (sorry, I don't remember the name, but follow thread by searching the word "Nineve") about Percy's childhood, the time he got Scabby and his life, and after that I am convinced that he is not in allyance with the Dark side, but is only a fool, as Barty Crouch Father was. Carol again: Actually I wasn't justifying Percy's behavior, which I discussed at length in another post comparing him to Quirrell and stating that in my view he's not evil but deluded. My point in the post you partially quoted was that IF someone cast an Imperius curse on him, it was most unlikely to be Scabbers and was more probably Lucius Malfoy. (I don't necessarily think that's what happened but I don't discount the possibility.) I also suggested a way in which Percy might have acquired Scabbbers as a little boy and argued that Scabbers was probably looking for someone to take care of him, not someone he could turn into a servant of Voldemort. Carol From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au Sat Nov 15 22:28:23 2003 From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 08:28:23 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Whole Evans Theory References: Message-ID: <008d01c3abc7$c8b20f60$7e984cca@Monteith> No: HPFGUIDX 85123 >ghinghapuss wrote > Now as far as Mark Evans being a relative? I don't buy it. Evans if > the most common of welsh names. So is Mark. But it does seem like a > big coincidence especially in a book whose author who puts so much > research into the names of her characters. We know JKR picked that > name for a reason, but I believe that reason is a big fat red herring. Oh me too *smile*. JKR has mentioned a number of times what a kick she gets out of the message boards and all the theorising that goes on, so I wouldn't put it past her to have exactly the evil type of sense of humour to do just that. Nox (ok, I'm over it now) From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Nov 15 22:28:40 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 22:28:40 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85124 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "marinafrants" wrote: > But in Lupin's case, the last he needed was people giving him a > second look. His whole existence at Hogwarts depended on keeping a > huge and difficult-to-conceal secret. Drawing other people's > attention too much was not just uncomfortable or undesirable for > him, it was dangerous. And what would've been the point, really? > To combat prejudice against werewolves? Since nobody was supposed > to know Lupin was a werewolf, showcasing his accomplilshments would > not have achieved it. Ron's elevation to Prefect is, at least in > theory, a personal benefit for Ron. Lupin's would've done nothing > for him, or for the persecuted group he belongs to. Jen R.: You have a point, there, although appointing Lupin prefect at *all* draws people's attention to him and the fact that he disappears once a month for a few days at a time. I'm still not satisfied that DD gave Lupin the prefect badge only so he could reign in James and Sirius. It doesn't make sense becasue DD already knows he can't--will the badge really make a difference? Not to mention that appointing Lupin means at least several days out of the month he won't be available. Huh? It's counterintuitive for all practical purposes, which leads me to believe he appointed Lupin for a more personal reason than we're led to believe. Perhaps the "vote of confidence" is more personal--DD's way of instilling confidence in Lupin, not necessarily trying to sway others to notice Lupin's accomplishments. From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu Sat Nov 15 22:29:16 2003 From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 22:29:16 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85125 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" wrote: >> Annemehr wrote: >SIPPAGE> > Okay, first and most importantly, I do want JKR to write the story > she always meant to. But that understood, I don't want Harry to die. > I don't see that having been set apart and having suffered so much > already would necessarily make life not worth living. So what if he > never quite has a "normal" life; does that necessarily mean he could > never have a good one? (More rigorous and pitiless snippage) > Annemehr > > "I am /not/ going to be murdered," Harry said out loud. > "That's the spirit, dear," said his mirror sleepily. I realize this might well be considered a provencial point of view, but if Harry dies, if the ending is not simply bittersweet with the loss of many important characters, but if the ending should require the death of Harry, would the series be something we would want to read and re-read even into future generations? It would be gutsy to to kill Harry but I wouldn't want it to be gutsy for the sake of guts. Harry's death would break untold hearts, and disaffect them as well. A "happy ending" isn't necessary but a satisfactory one is. I am very hopeful JKR will want Harry to triumph over Lord Voldemort and live to tell the tale. Jennifer From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 22:03:45 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 22:03:45 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85126 Carol's message signature: Carol, who is wondering why you don't want little Mark to be important and how you can discount his age and name, which seem to me to be obvious clues to his significance. Astrofiammiante responded: > Carol, it's not that I don't want him to be important (which I think > I already pointed out), just there seem to me to be so many huge ifs > and buts involved in making him important. > > How he could possibly be Harry's sixth cousin twice removed, how the > Ministry of Magic could have overlooked a wizard birth in an area as > significant as Little Whinging, how two squibs, which seem to be > quite rare creatures could have met and married. Carol: He doesn't need to be more distant than a second cousin to have disappeared from MoM radar (which as we've seen with Mrs. Figg isn't very accurate), and we don't need a marriage between two squibs, only between a squib and a muggle who then have a muggle child who in turn fathers a muggle-born wizard. (I say "fathers" because the wizard blood appears to be in the Evans line.) I wouldn't be surprised if Mark also has Lily's green eyes, as others on this list have suggested, but that's only speculation. But the last name, his age, and Rowling's habit of dropping bits of information into the story line to be picked up later all strongly suggest that he'll be important to the story. His (presumed) relationship to Harry also ties in with Harry's mother as "muggle-born" and the idea (which can't be accurate if she and her sister really *are* muggle-born) that Petunia might be a squib. (I don't think she is. I place the squib at least one generation back.) So figuring out who Mark is helps to fit other pieces together. Astrofiammiante: > These things can all be explained away. But when does the point come > when you put so much effort into the process of explaining them that > it is simply more logical to accept the alternative - that Mark Evans > could be (gasp) a red herring, or even an accident? Carol: I admit that Rowling is capable of accidents, if you mean flints (the order of the spells in the first edition of GoF being the most obvious), but I don't think she would accidentally give a minor character Harry's mother's last name. Names, as she's said in numerous interviews, are important to her and she chooses them carefully. Why give this boy any name at all if he's not going to turn up again? She could have just had Dudley and gang beat up a little muggle boy, age and name unspecified. And why mention him at all, since he isn't really necessary to the plot at that point? To me it's like throwing in a reference to Scabbers' missing toe--a seemingly unimportant detail later reinforced by PP's mother receiving his finger in a box, all leading up to Scabbers' real identity and his silver hand. The Mark Evans reference is surely not an accident. A red herring, maybe. But usually a red herring has a clear purpose, for example, to make us think that Karkaroff or even Ludo Bagman might have put Harry's name in the goblet of fire in GoF. I can't think of any purpose that having Dudley beat up Mark would serve. How would it mislead us, which is what a red herring does? What mystery (other than Harry's family background) would it involve? Rowling wouldn't just think, "I'll give this boy Lily's last name, put him in her sister's neighborhood, and make him the right age to go to Hogwarts next year just to make the readers think that he might be related to Harry." Would she? It doesn't make sense. Astrofiammiante: > I have no agenda - I just disagree with you. In a perfectly friendly > manner, naturally. I ask you to accept that I think that it's > entirely possible that we may never hear about him again, and I > willingly accept that you confidently expect to meet him at the next > Hogwarts sorting ceremony. Carol: What, me admit that I might be wrong? ;-) Yes. Of course. And I didn't mean to seem hostile in asking my question. It just seemed as if you were determined to resist what seemed to me obvious clues. The lady doth protest too much. Sad, though, that we have to wait about three years to find out which one of us is right. Astrofiammiante: > One of my favourite ideas in the whole of Harry Potter fandom is > mightily unpopular on sections of this list - the Perseus Evans > anagram, a problem that presents all the same difficulties with > wizarding families producing offspring that are notionally muggle- > born and also that are possible purebloods. I'm not asking you to > agree with me about that - you probably think it's a crazy idea. > > But wouldn't life be boring if we all agreed with each other? > Imagine, if you will, a kind of Ministry of Magic-approved list of > what mad theories each of us can sign up to? No, let chaos reign. > > With all good wishes to you and little Mark ;- )) > > Astrofiammante Carol: Thanks for the good wishes. I thought Perseus Evans might have something to do with your resistance to Mark. But there's nothing in the canon about that, is there? Where did the idea originate? I know it's a way of accounting for Snape's reaction to Lily in the Pensieve scene, but it has (from what I've seen) an air of wishful thinking and even fanfic about it. (I also want to account for Snape's reactions and motives in general, and for Lily's origins, but I don't think we need an anagram to do that.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 22:23:11 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 22:23:11 -0000 Subject: Goyle sen. in Azkaban? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85127 > Carol wrote: > > > > Okay, my last paragraph is tongue in cheek, but I think dim-witted > > Goyle is about the only accomplice LV has left other than PP to help > > him rescue the prisoners. > > Berit wrote: > > You seem to have forgotten the proud and fierce Bellatrix ("Bella" > according to Tom :-). She'll probably come in more handy than Goyle > and PP put together... Carol: You're right. I'd forgotten dear Bella. But she's an escaped prisoner and will be in much the same situation as her cousin Sirius was in PoA--without the ability to transform into a dog. But you're right. That was a significant oversight on my part. So now we have Bella, Peter, and Goyle, Sr. to the rescue of the Azkaban prisoners. Maybe she'll wear an invisibility cloak. . . . Carol From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 22:44:47 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 22:44:47 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Leadership (was: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85128 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: But where, tell me, does Lupin take an interest in making friends with his enemies? Snape and Pettigrew are Lupin's enemies. I don't see him reaching out to them. Laura: Remus seems pretty conciliatory to Snape in both PoA and OoP. As for Wormtail, he's *everyone's* enemy. He's long past the point where a heart-to-heart would make a difference. From abigailnus at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 22:48:43 2003 From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 22:48:43 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Leadership (was: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85129 I (Abigail) wrote: > > Lupin's emotions are extremely hard to read. He always > behaves with great civility, but it's hard to discern his actual > feelings beneath his veneer of cordiality. Even in moments of > great distress, such as the SS or right after Sirius' death, he > keeps his head, speaking in a soft voice and counseling > reason. He always argues for the path of understanding > and discourse, is prepared to make friends of his enemies, and > takes an interest in the socially disenfranchised. > > > > Does this soound like anybody we know? Pippin replied: > > Yeah. You Know Who. Voldemort had a veneer of > cordiality when he was at Hogwarts. Everybody trusted him. > Takes an interest in Giants and Goblins, he does. Speaks for the > path of reason, at least in public, so that people like the Blacks > didn't know how far he was prepared to go behind the scenes. No, Voldemort had charm, which is something that neither Lupin nor Dumbledore possess. Voldemort sweet-talked his followers, made them promises, seduced them with dreams of power. Dumbledore speaks the truth, simply and plainly. He never sugar-coats it, or tries to put people at their ease when they shouldn't be (with the tragic exception of Harry). And neither does Lupin. For that matter, Lupin is about as far from charming as is it possible to be. His friendliness is low-key and unassuming - he's constantly amazed when people seek his company. Most importantly, unlike Voldemort, Dumbledore doesn't seek power. He wants to change the world, but not for his own benefit. His assuredness in the rightness of his cause is what give him his confidence. Lupin doesn't have that confidence yet, but like Dumbledore, he doesn't seek power, and seeks to do good. > > But where, tell me, does Lupin take an interest in making friends > with his enemies? He reaches out to Ron after Ron calls him a > werewolf, but I'd hardly call Ron an enemy. Snape and Pettigrew > are Lupin's enemies. I don't see him reaching out to them. Lupin reaches out to Snape all through PoA. He calls him Severus, treats him cordially despite Snape's obvious rudeness and blatant distrust. He doesn't buy the guy drinks or anything, but he's obviously making an overture in the hopes of putting the past behind them both, one which Snape categorically rebuffs. Abigail From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sat Nov 15 22:52:38 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 22:52:38 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85130 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" wrote: > I realize this might well be considered a provencial point of view, > but if Harry dies, if the ending is not simply bittersweet with the > loss of many important characters, but if the ending should require > the death of Harry, would the series be something we would want to > read and re-read even into future generations? It would be gutsy to > to kill Harry but I wouldn't want it to be gutsy for the sake of > guts. Harry's death would break untold hearts, and disaffect them as > well. A "happy ending" isn't necessary but a satisfactory one is. I > am very hopeful JKR will want Harry to triumph over Lord Voldemort > and live to tell the tale. Jen R.: Personally, there are ways Harry could die that I would make peace with. In many ways, he's lived his whole life following other people's plans for him, and it was refreshing to see Harry grow into his own person in OOTP, despite (or because of?) the outbursts and heartbreak at the end. Harry loves the WW dearly, even though he sees all the flaws and failures that are part of this world; maybe because he doesn't take the WW for granted like so many who have grown up in it. He's one of those rare beings who wants to 'do good' not for personal gain, or out of vengence or any other misguided reason--'doing good' is almost an ethical imperative with him, and perhaps is the power he holds over Voldemort. So for him to sacrifice himself to save the WW, for the 'family' he loves and the future of the WW--that seems completely within the realm of possibilty given who he is. That's what makes him so totally different from Voldemort, not fearing death. If that is the outcome, I would grieve but feel satisfied that Harry died on his own terms, for something he cherished and believed was greater than his own life. Sniff--I get sad just thinking about it :( From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Sat Nov 15 23:08:40 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 23:08:40 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85131 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says We know JKR is gutsy, not to mention ruthless, as a person would need to be to tell an audience full of wide-eyed children that she doesn't believe in magic and that Harry might die. We also know that she really, really doesn't want to go beyond seven books, but is unwilling to say "never". We know that she is pragmatic nearly to the point of cynicism. We (i.e., in this instance, I) are sure we read somewhere that JKR said that the fact that she is a practicing Christian is a key to the series. Okay, so where does this leave us? First of all, with only one character's motivations to analyze -- the author. My admittedly hopeful opinion is that Harry will live, at the brink of manhood, as an emotional blank slate for all the readers who have identified with him for years to scribble on as they choose... --JDR From foxmoth at qnet.com Sat Nov 15 23:31:15 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 23:31:15 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Leadership (was: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85132 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" . >>Dumbledore speaks the truth, simply and plainly. He never sugar-coats it, or tries to put people at their ease when they shouldn't be (with the tragic exception of Harry). And neither does Lupin. <<< "I made up all sorts of stories" PoA p354 "I sometimes felt guilty about betraying Dumbledore's trust" PoA p 355 "and I haven't changed" PoA p 356 When has Dumbledore made up all sorts of stories or betrayed anyone? I asked: > > > > But where, tell me, does Lupin take an interest in making friends with his enemies? He reaches out to Ron after Ron calls him a werewolf, but I'd hardly call Ron an enemy. Snape and Pettigrew are Lupin's enemies. I don't see him reaching out to them.<< Abigail: > > Lupin reaches out to Snape all through PoA. He calls him >Severus, treats him cordially despite Snape's obvious >rudeness and blatant distrust. Well, if somebody had pulled the Boggart thing on me, it'd take more than using my first name to make me believe the purpose was to put the past behind us, especially if that past was anything like what we saw in the Pensieve. I find it hard to believe that Lupin had no choice but to handle Neville's boggart the way he did. Suppose Neville's boggart had been Harry. What would you think of Lupin's methods then? Pippin From stevejjen at earthlink.net Sun Nov 16 00:05:26 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 00:05:26 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Leadership (was: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85133 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > Abigail: > > > > Lupin reaches out to Snape all through PoA. He calls him > >Severus, treats him cordially despite Snape's obvious > >rudeness and blatant distrust. Pippin: > Well, if somebody had pulled the Boggart thing on me, it'd take > more than using my first name to make me believe the purpose > was to put the past behind us, especially if that past was > anything like what we saw in the Pensieve. > > I find it hard to believe that Lupin had no choice but to handle > Neville's boggart the way he did. Suppose Neville's boggart had > been Harry. What would you think of Lupin's methods then? Jen R.: Lupin repeatedly proves himself to be an advocate for the students throughout POA and OOTP. I think the boggart thing was less about thwarting Snape and more about supporting Neville. Just as Snape humiliates, threatens and picks on Neville in the public arena of his classroom, Lupin made the choice to allow Neville to work through some of his fears in a public setting as well, with the same children who have to endure seeing Neville endlessly bullied. I saw it less as "rub Snape's nose in it" and more like providing some much needed catharsis for all the Gryffindor students who suffer under Snape's tutelage. Snape's an adult--he can hate Lupin all he wants for that demonstration and I can't say I'd blame him, but I was glad to see Lupin prioritize Neville's fears over Snape's possible future animosity. In three years, no one else seems to have stepped up to help Neville, to the point that Snape became his greatest fear--and after the life he's had, that says a lot! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 15 23:09:56 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 23:09:56 -0000 Subject: LV's remaining Death Eaters (Was Goyle sen. in Azkaban?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85134 > Carol wrote: > > I haven't checked this out fully, but I think that all the > > other DEs named by Voldermort in GoF (Avery, Macnair, Malfoy, and > > Crabbe) were there, along with Rookwood, the Lestranges, Dolohov and > > others who escaped from Azkaban. (I'm not sure where Jugson fits in; > > he may be one of the escapees, too, but his name doesn't ring a bell > > with me.) Anyway, it would appear that most if not all of LV's > > previously identified DEs except Goyle and Pettigrew (not counting > > coward Karkaroff and ex-DE Snape) were arrested after the Ministry > > raid. > > Annemehr: > Okay, I checked GoF and OoP. You're right, all of the previously > identified DEs except Goyle, Pettigrew, and Bellatrix have been > captured. I thought it might be interesting to try to estimate how > many DEs LV might have left: Now, my impression of the graveyard scene in > GoF is that there had to have been quite a few DEs that LV passed in > silence, but I hate to try to put a number on it. Still, let's see > what we can come up with for the DEs still at large: > > 2 named DEs from the graveyard who did not participate > 3 (or 4) escapees who did not participate > 1 participant (Bellatrix) rescued by LV > ? unnamed DEs from the graveyard who did not participate > > That leaves Voldemort with more than six DEs, and I would feel pretty > safe assuming he has at least ten left after the DoM debacle. So he > does have a few minions left -- at least half. Carol: Thanks for checking into this. It seems to account for Goyle's absence and I think you're right that we need to take the missing Death Eaters into account. I suppose Voldemort was too wily to send all of the DEs to the DoM, though I doubt he expected them to be arrested. He probably also thought that Harry would be alone and no match for nine grown men and a woman. Now we just need to figure out which Death Eater has a head that keeps transforming into a baby's and back again. (It's possible that was Goyle and was the reason he wasn't mentioned.) > > Carol: > > P.S. Thanks for backing me up on my Theodore Nott theory, > > Hickengruendler. > > Annemehr: > There's one thing I remembered about DE Nott that's interesting, > though it doesn't affect Hickengruendler's theory too much. Someone > once (before OoP) pointed out that in the GoF graveyard, Nott is > described as a "stooped figure," which makes him sound old -- old > enough to be Theodore Nott's grandfather, perhaps? Carol: I wondered about that, too. Theodore Nott is "weedy" and posssibly "stringy." Maybe feebleness runs in his family. But Avery, at 49, is the oldest DE mentioned so far. Most of them seem to be in the same age range as Snape and Malfoy, that is, mid-thirties to early forties. Nott, Sr., is apparently a weak character, who grovels before Voldemort in GoF. Maybe he's stooped from torture and imprisonment in Azkaban. Voldemort doesn't seem to have recruited many wizards from the previous generation. Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 15 14:23:53 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 14:23:53 -0000 Subject: More Questions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85135 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: Tonks: > > ... Hagrid ... tells Harry that his mum and dad were Head Boy and Head > > Girl. I know we only have one instance (of headboy) in canon- Percy, > > that we can directly derive any fact. So, if DD made Lupin prefect for > > his year, why would he derail from this decision ...and appoint James > > as Head Boy? > > > > > bboy_mn: > > Pure speculation, we need our Brit school experts to weigh in on this > one, but I concluded that Head Boy was based on different objectives > than Prefect. > As other posters have remarked Prefect systems vary. I went to an all- boys state grammar school - not a public school. There, the Prefects were on the Sixth Form and were appointed as School Prefects; the question of houses was not addressed. It was done on merit and, interestingly, the existing Prefect body was also consulted when new folk were being appointed. The School Captain (equivalent to Head Boy) was appointed from within the Prefect body. Geoff From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 15 22:58:48 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 22:58:48 -0000 Subject: Endings In-Reply-To: <86AEF35E-17A4-11D8-B255-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85136 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith wrote: Kneasy: > So, what would be your odds for a happy ending? > All in all, the circumstances of his genesis do not hold out a great > deal of hope - particularly the train journey; in the UK they are so > bad they generally promote rage and an inclination to kill, *kill*, > KILL! > > I think it's thumbs down for Harry; 3:1 he doesn't make it. Geoff: I think, Dementors and Malfoy apart, Harry's experiences on the Hogwarts Express have been reasonably good in terms of the actual rail journey. My own experiences on UK railways, mainly longer distance journeys, have been pretty good in recent years. I dearly want to see Mark Evans revealed as Harry's long lost something-or-other..... I dearly want to see Harry survive. Never mind the golden sunsets and the fields of swaying flowers. Survive will suffice. I dearly want to see England wipe the floor with France in the Rugby World Cup final; I wonder if an excellent Quidditch Seeker might help their chances? Portkey for Harry to Sydney anyone? From hebrideanblack at earthlink.net Sun Nov 16 01:40:49 2003 From: hebrideanblack at earthlink.net (Wendy) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 01:40:49 -0000 Subject: Muggles in the Wizarding World Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85137 Last night, I was pondering some things about the Wizarding World, and came up with some questions. I don't think these are actually answerable conclusively with what we have so far in the canon, but I would love to hear what others think seems likely about them. Mostly, I'm wondering about Muggles interacting with the Wizarding World. We know that they can get into Diagon Alley somehow (Hermione's parents are there in CoS), but *how*? Could they have gotten through the entrance without Hermione and her wand? I'm also curious about transporation. Obviously, Muggles can't apparate. It appears that not even all wizards can apparate. But what about Floo Powder? Is it the powder that holds the magic (in which case a Muggle should be able to use it), or does the hand that throws the powder need to have magic, as well (in which case, Muggles would just get very warm and not go anywhere if they tried to travel by Floo)? Same question for Portkeys - it is the Portkey that is magical, or it is the combination of Portkey and magical person that matters? I tend to think that anyone could travel by Portkey (including Muggles). I'm less certain that Floo could be used by Muggles, though. And what about broomsticks? Is the enchantment on the broom enough to keep a Muggle afloat, or does the person riding it need magic as well, to make it work? I'm also curious about how Muggles would fit into the Wizarding justice system (such as it is). Would the WW have jurisdiction over a Muggle who committed a crime in a magical place (Diagon Alley, for example), or against a Witch or Wizard? Could a Muggle be sent to Azkaban? Or given a Dementor's Kiss? OoP would indicate that a Muggle could receive a kiss (in terms of the soul being sucked out), but I'm wondering if the Wizarding court would believe itself to have the authority to sentence a Muggle to that fate. Looking forward to hearing some thoughts about these things. :-) Cheers! Wendy From Malady579 at hotmail.com Sun Nov 16 01:41:39 2003 From: Malady579 at hotmail.com (Melody) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 01:41:39 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85138 Annemehr wrote: >Didn't we just touch on this subject in OTC recently? Oh, well, I'm >ready to weigh in again! Oh dear, did we? I have been in another world lately, I am sorry. Hope you do not mind me rambling on about it. I do so like to ramble. ::big grin:: Melody wrote: >>So, killing Harry seems gracious to me almost. To me, he will never >>be normal. Annemehr wrote: >Well, I agree with everything you said *except* that killing Harry >would be gracious. **clip a bit** >As we read, we understand more and more that Harry has lived a life >bounded by and crushed under the evil of Voldemort. I would really >like to see him get out from under that and live before he dies. >He's never had that before, and goodness knows he's earned it. Yes, I think he has more than earned that right, I just think at this point and after five books, it is impossible, in my mind, that he can. Oh, he can try. By all means, he should do things in book six like he did in five like go out with Cho and be uncomfortable and get his first kiss. It is endearing and helps to establish normalcy, but now that he knows all this, I wonder if he will *want* to do things like that. I guess he will still fly in quidditch and get over this amazement phase of "gee I have to save the world." But, will Harry want to drag his friends into that world with him? At the end of OoP, he had not and that makes me wonder. In the rest of the books, Harry had told Ron and Hermione *everything* by the end. OoP, Ch 38 "Harry's heart began to race. He had not told Ron, Hermione, or anyone else what the prophecy had contained." I find that telling. No one asked Harry not to tell. Before Harry would only keep his mouth shut when he promise he would not tell. He has not promised. ----- Melody wrote: >>And that is how I see Harry. It is so hard for me to sit on my >>hands with Matrix: Revolutions comparisons, but I true want Harry to >>be the same kind of hero. Kind of daft. In his own world or >>reality. But the right one that can save everything if he only >>trust himself, his advisors (even Snape), and his intuition. Mandy: > I'm right there with you Melody. For the entire last 20 min of > Matrix Revolutions I'm sitting there thinking, "That's what's going > to happen to Harry." "That's what's going to happen to Harry." Over > and over again. Really?!? Oh, Wow. That more that makes me ecstatic that someone else saw and wants that too. I was at a theater with those seats that rock, and I sat there swaying back and forth giddy at the thought of Harry doing a "Neo". It was just such a noble ending. Someone taking up the cloak of their destiny and facing it head on very unsure of what will happen but sure they will do all they can to protect more than themselves. That is how I want Harry to be. I want to be able to respect him forever and almost be in awe of the decision he made based on all he was taught. That said, I wonder how much more can we parallel to Matrix. I see Ginny as Trinity. Ron and Hermione as Morpheus and Niobe. Yes, loosely. ;) But I see Ron and Hermione off in their quest bit, and I see Ginny helping Harry. I also see Trinity's plot line working very well with Ginny's. (Geez, this is hard not to give away spoilers) Mandy continued: > I can't really seeing it ending any other way. But, of course, that > is how JKR wants us to see it right now and she has a genius for > manipulation. I can tell you in every book she's guided me exactly > where she wants me to go, has me thinking Harry's thoughts a split > second before he speaks them and when I put that realization along > with her hint's in interviews about him possibly not surviving, and > the definite end of the saga at book 7, she most definitely wants us > to believe, that at least for now, he is going to die. Hmm. She does make that difficult. I still think she says she might kill Harry to make us realize she is in charge of all this and not the genre. Melody From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Sun Nov 16 01:39:52 2003 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 01:39:52 -0000 Subject: The Case for Lupin Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85139 I must say it is with some fear that I attack one of the most formidable (and twisted) theory of HPFGU : ESE!Lupin. But there it is, today I join the PARTY LINE. Let us start with the infamous post 39362. Let us look at the string of arguments used : 1) First, ESE!Lupin explains why Lupin never told Dumbledore about the all animagus story, why he was so calm in the Shack, why he left the Map on his desk, why he forgot to take his potion... 2) It explains why Crouch!Moody is so apt a teacher, and why he is so skilful at gaining Harry's confidence. 3) It explains most of the creepy side of Lupin, as can be seen mainly in PoA, for instance his habits of killing creature and it fits with some traits of his personality (such as sadism when he mentioned to Harry his parents). 4) It explains why he was reluctant to touch Harry during the Dementors lesson. Ok. So let us examine them one by one, in what I feel is from the less convincing to the most. 5) has been somewhat weakened by the following books in my opinion. After all, Crouch!Moody does take Harry in his arms, Macnair almost strangled Harry in the Department of Mystery and Lupin himself held Harry just after Sirius's death. Of course, it can be argued that Lupin's movement was rather a clue to his true nature, rather than a rational act, we will come back to this. 2) Lupin was in the Order during the first war so he probably "thinks highly of Mad- Eye Moody" like Arthur Weasley. Lupin was an outstanding teacher, there seems to be a consensus on that. So it seems in my opinion perfectly in character for him to send a letter to Moody before the beginning of term. 3) This one is a tough one. Lupin is scary. No doubt. Only I think JKR wrote him so in PoA for a specific reason, and not because he's ESE. What did you feel the first time you read PoA ? The memory I have of PoA is that of a very dark book, because the good side seems completely helpless in it. No matter what Dumbledore and the other teachers do, Sirius Black seems to be able to come closer to Harry each time. This, plus the suspicion expressed by Snape and the fears of Harry about the secret passage, conveys the idea that "something wicked this way comes" (I love the choir). Something is rotten in the realm of Hogwarts. It is my opinion that Lupin has been carefully depicted in order to convey the idea that there is something dark in him, but it is also my conviction that JKR did this to make the final confrontation in the Shack a climax. From the very first encounter with Lupin in the Hogwarts Express, one can feel an incredible tension around this character. And JKR is very careful not to let this tension drop : hints like "it is not poisoned you know" or "I thought I knew [Sirius Black]" are tantalising. From what I have read in this list, some actually thought that Lupin was a Polyjuiced Sirius. It certainly seems that many, including me, thought he was responsible in some way for the ease Sirius could enter the castle (and in a sense he was). But the thing is I cannot really sense this tension in GoF (where Lupin is absent anyway, apart from Dumbledore asking Sirius to go to his place) nor in OoP. OoP's Lupin seemed to me gentle and mature, not scary at all. So I would say that Creepy!Lupin was a most effective plot device for PoA, and not an indication that he is ESE. 1) Now this one is a hard one. Why Lupin did not tell Dumbledore ? And why did he forgot to take his potion ? As for the second one, I would say that seeing Pettigrew on the map must have been an incredible shock. James, Sirius and Peter were all for Lupin. In one night, he had lost them all three. Or so he thought : if Peter is alive, then everything seems to fit again, the traitor was Peter, and Sirius is innocent. I likr to think that it must have been as disturbing for him than for Sirius to see Peter in the Daily Prophet. Sirius broke free, Lupin rush out of his office. And forgot the potion. It seems reasonable to me. But why, in the name of Merlin, did he not tell Dumbledore, if he genuinely thought Sirius was evil ? I think I will try to answer this in detail in a forthcoming post on PoA. I do not include my line of reasoning here, because it is extensive meta-thinking, whereas my other arguments are more canon related. That would be my answer to post 39362. Other arguments have been advanced in later posts, I'll try to answer three of them. 1) Lupin could very well have killed Sirius. 2) Lupin did not talk to Snape to persuade him to resume Occlumency lesson. As for 1), I agree that it is not possible to prove that Lupin did not kill Sirius. But there is something I think is quite hard to understand if he did. Why did he held Harry ? For all we know, Harry was "sprint[ing] toward the dais." Without Lupin, he would have jumped right through it, wouldn't he ? And that would mean no more Harry. And nobody could have blamed Lupin, Harry was obviously very eager to go there ("Harry struggled hard and viciously" and later "still he thought Lupin with every bit of strength he had"). So why would an ESE!Lupin prevent Harry from committing suicide ? 2) is very disturbing. Yet, nothing proves it. First, canon is that Lupin overemphasises the importance of Occlumency ("There is nothing so important as you learning Occlumency" Lupin said sternly), then Harry says he'll try do talk to Snape (and of course he doesn't). Lupin never said he would speak to Snape, all he says is that between Sirius and him, it should be his responsibility, rather than Sirius's to speak to Snape. Later, Harry wonders if Lupin has done so, but remarks that Snape avoids him completely. We know from his behaviour towards Sirius and from the confession of Dumbledore that Snape has not come to term yet with the humiliation he suffered when he was at school. So even if Lupin did speak to Snape, it is easy to explain he continued to ignore Harry. In fact, seeing that Snape is perfectly aware of the iportance of Occlumency, the fact he ignored him would rather be a huge hint to an ESE!Snape rather than an ESE!Lupin. Last but not least, there is something I don't understand in JKR psychology if Lupin turns out to be ESE. In the live interview on Scholastic.com (02/03/00), she was asked to choose a teacher to teach her children. She picked Lupin "because he is kind, clever, and gives very interesting lessons." Now she could have chose McGonagall, who is certainly a most qualified teacher, Flitwick, who seems very nice too, or Dumbledore for that matter. That Lupin is one of JKR's favourite character (same interview) is not contradictory to him being ESE, but what kind of sadist would she be to wish her children to be taught by an evil man ? I hope I will be able to write more on the underlying symbolism of PoA soon, thereby exhibiting new arguments. For today, I hope I have been worthy of a PARTY LINE badge and will go to bed. All the best, Olivier PS : I almost forgot. The Boggart incident. I always felt that as Snape is Neville's boggart, and as the way to defeat a boggart is turning it in ridicule, Lupin had no choice but to ridiculed Snape one way or another if he wanted to teach Neville a proper lesson. What should he have done ? If he had told Neville not to face the boggart when learning the boggart would assume Snape's form, it would have been one more humiliation for Neville, who already had been treated with incredible contempt by Snape twice that day. From belijako at online.no Sun Nov 16 03:06:53 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 03:06:53 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85140 hickengruendler wrote: If I were Voldemort, I would have tried to kill Harry and Neville. Therefore the Potters and the Longbottoms were both on his "to die" list. But maybe Frank and ALice longbottom had a trustworthy secret keeper, therefore he had the chance to go to the Potters first. Me: True, Voldemort didn't know for sure that it was Harry he was after and not Neville, but according to cannon he was more interested in Harry than in Neville. Therefore it was not just a coincidence that he came for Potter first. Dumbledore says in OoP (p. 742 Brit.Vers.): Quote: "He chose the boy he thought most likely to be a danger to him... He chose the half-blood, like himself. He saw himself in you [Harry] before he had even seen you..." Berit From ereturtle18 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 03:12:44 2003 From: ereturtle18 at yahoo.com (ereturtle18) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 03:12:44 -0000 Subject: FILK: Love My Friends (Silly Songs With Harry) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85141 I haven't been on here much lately, but I've memorized most of the Veggie Tales filks, and now I've decided to try and write one myself. Hope it's good. Love My Friends to "Love My Lips" from Veggie Tales NARRATOR: One day, while talking with Albus Dumbledore, Harry confronts one of his deepest fears. HARRY: If Voldemort ever killed my friends That would be the day that my world ends. I'd be so sad. I might go mad. ALBUS: You'd be so sad, you might go mad? HARRY: I'd be so sad. If I lost Ron or Hermione How I'd go on I just can't see I would despair, if they weren't there. ALBUS: You would despair if they weren't there? HARRY: I would despair. If my friends ever left my side, I'd be alone; I'd surely die. Oh, I'd give in, and Voldy'd win. ALBUS: You'd give in and Voldy'd win? HARRY: Oh, I'd give in. ALBUS: So what you're saying is, if your friends left you HARRY: I'd be so sad, I might go mad! I would despair if they weren't there, and I'd give in and Voldy'd win! Oh, I'd give in. ALBUS: This may be more serious than I thought. [Waves wand, conjuring and oddly shaped puff of smoke, the Wizard World version of an inkblot.] Harry, what do you see here? HARRY: Um, that looks like a curse. ALBUS: And here? HARRY: It's a curse! ALBUS: And here? HARRY: It's a curse. It's a curse. It's a curse, curse, curse! It's a curse. It's a curse. It's a curse, curse, curse! It's a curse. It's a curse. It's a curse, curse, curse! Cuuuuurse, curse, curse, curse! ALBUS: Harry, tell me about your childhood. HARRY: When I was just one year old Ol' Voldy left me in the cold. He killed my folks, like other blokes. ALBUS: He killed your folks, like other blokes? HARRY: He killed my folks. I grew up with the Durse-el-lys. I'd rather have been in a nursery! They treated me bad, but they were all I had. ALBUS: They treated you bad; they were all you had? HARRY: They treated me bad. On the day I got my letter, I thought my life just might get better. But my troubles grew, 'cause Voldy tried to take the Sorcerer's Stone and I had to stop him and then he tried to kill people with a basilisk and he almost got Ginny and then he got his body back and he killed Cedric and his disciple killed Sirius and I wanted to use an Unforgivable Curse on her, so I did: Crucio! ALBUS: Your troubles grew Crucio ? Harry, why did you use that? HARRY: I dunno. ALBUS: So what you're saying is when you were young HARRY: He killed my folks like other blokes! They treated me bad, but they're all I had. My troubles grew Crucio! ALBUS: I'm ashamed. HARRY: Sorry, sir. ALBUS: No more Unforgivables. HARRY: Okay. NARRATOR: That's it for Silly Songs with Harry. Tune in next time to hear Harry say HARRY: Did I ever tell you how I feel about Malfoy? ALBUS: Oh, look, it's Moody! ~a FILK by ereturtle18~ From zanelupin at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 04:04:41 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 04:04:41 -0000 Subject: The Case for Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85142 Olivier, who wrote an excellent post that I just snipped down to one point said: >As for 1), I agree that it is not possible to prove that Lupin did not kill Sirius. But there is something I think is quite hard to understand if he did. Why did he held Harry ? For all we know, Harry was "sprint[ing] toward the dais." Without Lupin, he would have jumped right through it, wouldn't he ? And that would mean no more Harry. And nobody could have blamed Lupin, Harry was obviously very eager to go there ("Harry struggled hard and viciously" and later "still he thought Lupin with every bit of strength he had"). So why would an ESE!Lupin prevent Harry from committing suicide?< KathyK: I will leave the discussion for ESE!Lupin to those posters better able than I to argue it's points. But Killer!Lupin I can do. If Lupin did in fact kill Sirius, and is evil to boot, why not let Harry run after Sirius into the veil? Well there's one very simple reason. *Dumbledore was watching.* OoP, US edition 806: "Harry released Neville, though he was unaware of doing so. He was jumping down the steps again, pulling out his wand, as Dumbledore turned to the dais too." And later on that page: "But as [Harry] reached the ground and sprinted toward the dais, Lupin grabbed Harry around the chest, holding him back." Dumbledore saw Sirius fall. Now, we don't have canon on Dumbledore's exact positioning immediately after Sirius went through the archway but we do have Harry struggling to reach it and him yelling for Sirius after Lupin had hold of him, I'd say it's a pretty safe bet Dumbledore was aware Lupin was preventing him following Sirius. And Lupin may be evil, but he's not stupid by any stretch. It was risky enough killing Sirius in a room full of people that included Dumbledore. If he just let Harry zoom to his death, I don't know that he'd make it out of there. Besides, if Lupin didn't catch him, Dumbledore would have, IMO, and it would have unnecessarily blown Lupin's cover. At least at this point if anyone had seen him take a shot at Sirius, he could have claimed to be, as Kirstini put it, Assasin With Dodgy Aim!Lupin. That he was just trying to help a friend out of a tight spot and regrettably missed. And if Killer!Lupin did it by accident, or killed Sirius for other reasons rather than his being Eversoevil, there's no reason to think he wouldn't have protected Harry from following Sirius through the archway. KathyK, who doesn't think Killer!Lupin did it by accident From nibleswik at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 04:31:14 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 04:31:14 -0000 Subject: Head Boy/Girl Material, was: Re: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85143 > It is hard to define what makes a Head girl or boy. The decision > of course rests in the headmaster. But I could go through and > tell you who I think were or should have been Heads in their day. > James was definitely head boy material, as was Lily. Arthur is not > Head material although Molly is. Lucius Malfoy is Head boy > material, dangerously so, but Bellatrix is not.(Bella is a leader > but far to unabashedly psychotic for any headmaster to responsibly > give her that job.) Hermione and Harry both embody the qualities > for Headship but Ron does not. (Although he might grow into it.) > Cedric Diggory definitely head boy material. I can't remember if > he was or not? None of the Dursleys are. Dumbledore and McGonagall > are, Snape is not. Ginny Weasley definitely head girl material but > I would have said Percy was not, so ultimately who knows? Me: Hmm . . . though Harry may be Head Boy material, I'm very much hoping he won't get the position. For one thing, he really does have too much to worry about as it is. For another, wouldn't it be more interesting for Ron to be Head Boy? Now, wouldn't it be REALLY interesting if Neville or Draco were Head Boy? Those would both have really weird effects on everything. Neville would be more surprised than anyone else, have no idea what to do, but end up being a wonderful Head Boy. Draco . . . well, I just want to see Harry that mad. .:Cackles:. I agree with most of your assessments, though. I'm not sure I agree with your assessment of Bella -- how do we know she was ALWAYS that blatantly psychotic? I mean, in OotP, she's just escaped from a long stint in Azkaban, so her screwiness is understandable. Our only previous direct exposure to her (not just hearing about her torturing the Longbottoms) was in DD's Pensieve, and there she could just have been going out with a bang. Furthermore, she had then spent quite a few years as a DE. All these experiences happened after she left Hogwarts. She could have acted entirely differently then. The other one I don't agree with is Percy. Granted, he may not be a fantastic leader, but mightn't the criteria for Head Boyhood change from year to year? The year he was Head Boy, dangerous criminal Sirius Black had escaped. It was a time when order was needed, when following rules was important. Percy exemplifies the studious and lawful wizard. I think he was just the right Humongous Bighead for that year, and that he might not have gotten the position in another. Natalie, who would really like it if people stopped writing Blaise Zambini, as his last name is Zabini, and who will now scamper off and be the spelling nazi no more From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 15 19:18:25 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 19:18:25 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85144 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" wrote: > Carolyn: > > Thanks Geoff, I missed that one ! So, just we're left with the puzzle > over Harry's green eyes. Jen Reese has again pointed out the canon > for them apparently being important, so maybe its just something JKR > could not influence in the movie. Geoff: But as someone pointed out, although Harry is green eyed in the book, Dainel Radcliffe didn't wear contact lenses. Possibly he is allergic to them. Some people can't wear them. Let's hope it doesn't cause a clash between a future movie and the books. From annemehr at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 06:31:31 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 06:31:31 -0000 Subject: LV's remaining Death Eaters (Was Goyle sen. in Azkaban?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85145 Carol wrote: > Now we just need to figure out which Death > Eater has a head that keeps transforming into a baby's and back again. Annemehr: All righty! Well, it was very kind of JKR to have Lucius Malfoy name all the Death Eaters as he was pairing them off to hunt for Harry. I checked the DoM battle for DEs named after the one fell into the bell jar and eliminated them -- Malfoy, Macnair, Bellatrix, Dolohov, and Rookwood. We also know it's not Nott, because he's the one who got injured in the hall of prophecies. Next I checked the pairings and eliminated a few more based on who they were paired with: I eliminated Mulciber because he was paired with Malfoy, and as Harry heard both voices of the pair that included the baby-head DE, he would have recognised if one of them were Malfoy. I eliminated Jugson because he was paired with Dolohov (he of the slashing purple flame spell), and Dolohov was part of the pair who came in right *after* the DE fell into the bell jar. I eliminated Rodolphus because he was paired with Bellatrix, and Harry would have been sure to notice if she was paired with the DE who fell into the bell jar -- he heard both DEs voices and saw both sets of feet. That leaves Crabbe, Rabastan, and Avery as possibilities. You'd *think* that if Vincent Crabbe's father had been baby-headed in the DoM, rather than merely arrested, Harry would have heard about it from him or Draco back at Hogwarts. So, maybe Crabbe Sr. is unlikely? The DE who fell into the bell jar was described as having a rough voice, which doesn't seem to be like Avery's voice that Harry heard in the graveyard. So maybe it's Rabastan? A tenuous conclusion at best! By the way, I don't think the DE's head keeps transforming back and forth. I think once he'd pulled it out of the jar, and as it was in baby form at the time, that it's just stuck that way. I wonder if St Mungo's even has any idea what to do with him, since that bell jar is one of the *mysteries* of the DoM. They might have to bring in Croaker to sort it out! Annemehr From madoushi_clef_00 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 05:21:54 2003 From: madoushi_clef_00 at yahoo.com (Master Clef) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 21:21:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggles in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031116052154.57528.qmail@web41310.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85146 >*snip*But what about Floo Powder? Is it the powder that holds the magic (in which case a Muggle should be able to use it), or does the hand that throws the powder need to have magic, *snip* *waves* Hi, first post, totally amazed at everyone's post thus far on the list. I feel like a five year old who found her way into a college philosophy class. So, like I did at my Mom's college biology class at the same age, I'm going to dive right in. I would say, Floo Powder is magical in and of itself; the question is how would a muggle acquire it, and know to state their intended destination before use? Outside of pranks, living through a B&E of a wizard's home (which, I would think would be very difficult for muggles), or inheriting some from a long lost relative I think Floo Powder is an unlikely source for Muggles appearing in Diagon Alley. >*snip*Same question for Portkeys - it is the Portkey that is magical, or it is the combination of Portkey and magical person that matters? *snip* If I remember GoF correctly, I think the portkeys are designed only to work at a particular time, from that particular place to the other. The Weasley's transport to the Tournament, but later someone (Bagman?) mentions 'catching a portkey' like once catches a subway train, perhaps you don't have to limit the number of people transporting on any one portkey, but I think each spell is a limited to one shot back and forth. Until Harry grabbed th trophy and ported back to the Hogwarts' field, I thought portkeys only went one way. There was a discarded pile of portkeys at the Tournament. If the spell is continuous, and has multiple uses, what would have stopped Dumbldore from inviting Fudge to see the graveyard Harry and Cedric were transported to? Evidence of LV return might still linger. (I'm still surprised no one has developed time magic to review past events from a safe perspective, like the Pensive. Unless that causes a temporal loop, but that's Star Trek's territory...) >I'm also curious about how Muggles would fit into the Wizarding justice system (such as it is). Would the WW have jurisdiction over a Muggle who committed a crime in a magical place (Diagon Alley, for example), or against a Witch or Wizard? Could a Muggle be sent to Azkaban? Or given a Dementor's Kiss? OoP would indicate that a Muggle could receive a kiss (in terms of the soul being sucked out), but I'm wondering if the Wizarding court would believe itself to have the authority to sentence a Muggle to that fate. I find it clear from Aurthur Weasley's dying Muggle Protection Act in CoS through the abuse given to Arabella Figg (abuse for being a Dumbledore Supporter, notwithstanding) that Muggles are almost non-persons to the WW. They seem to have no rights to speak of, and seems to be looked upon as, "awwwww, how cute! Look, those muggles have phellytones. How do they get along without magic?" But seriously, yes, the WW would arrest anyone committing a crime on their turf; just like America would arrest an illegal alien. I can't see them sending a muggle to Azkaban. If the crime were serious enough, the offended party involved might take their own revenge. OTOH, muggles don't seem to have the power to hurt wizards. The Inquisition was a joke to the WW. For minor offenses, I think the WW would obliterate their memory, return whatever property was lost/damaged/whatever, and make sure the muggle would avoid that area for the rest of their life. So, I say yes, the WW's arrogance knows few boundaries. Look how they treated the centaurs--"near human intelligence?"--the ACLU would beat them bloody (if they were prone to violence). Will stop now. Job interview tomorrow. ~Clef --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 08:09:58 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 08:09:58 -0000 Subject: Muggles in the Wizarding World In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85147 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Wendy" wrote: > Wendy: > > ...edited... > > Mostly, I'm wondering about Muggles interacting with the Wizarding > World. We know that they can get into Diagon Alley somehow > (Hermione's parents are there in CoS), but *how*? Could they have > gotten through the entrance without Hermione and her wand? > bboy_mn: Not just any muggle can get into 'magic space' like Diagon Alley. This is the entrance to the most secret society on the face of the earth; at least, on the face of the fictional earth. So muggle don't come and go as they please. First, they can't see the entrance to The Leakey Cauldron in the same sense that they can't see the Knight Bus or Hogwarts Express. The only way to walk into Diagon Alley/Leakey Cauldron is to have a magical guide escort you through. Hermione's parent get in because some one had told Hermione where it is and how it works, and her magical eyes allow her to see the entrance on Charing Cross Road. She sees it, and her parents follow close behind as she leads them in. Based on Ron's statement that there are a lot of Muggle/Magic intermarriages, I think there are a substantial number of muggles who are aware of the wizard world. Take Seamus's father who is a muggle; he knows his wife is a witch, and they still seem to be together, so one can only assume that he is aware of and has been to the magic world. Pretty hard for him not to be aware, I think. I also have my own theory, stated here many times, that a significant number of the muggle/magic intermarriages live predominantly in the muggle world. This puts them in the perfect position to use their shops and businesses as a way for the wizard world and the muggle world to interface. A means by which Gringot's can engage in currency exchange, for example. Also, a means by which goods and services can be exchanges. Are there really enough magical gardens to supply the entire wizard world with things like cabbage, lettuce, strawberries, meat, potatoes, tea, coffee, etc...? I'm pretty sure that I, as a muggle living in the USA, get most of my apples from New Zealand. If my apples can come from half way across the world, it doesn't seem unreasonable that wizard world apples are also imported. So, these muggle shops run by the spouses of magic people could easily funnel fresh produce into the wizard world. In a sense, they are just import/export companies, but instead of trading between England and France, they trade between magic and muggle. As long as they can keep ahead of the tax man, they could do quite well in a business like this. > Wendy: > > I'm also curious about transporation. ... But what about Floo > Powder? Is it the powder that holds the magic, or does the hand that > throws the powder need to have magic, .... bboy_mn: Remember that Floo Poweder travel is based on being hooked up to the Floo Network. I think the Network is where the magical transportation enchantment is. The Floo Poweder is merely the means by which the Floo Network is activated. Like buying a ticket for the subway, you've got to have it, but it's not what makes the subway run. > Wendy: > > Same question for Portkeys - it is the Portkey that is magical, or > it is the combination of Portkey and magical person that matters? > ..edited.. bboy_mn: These are very interesting and very tough questions. On one hand, a Portkey is an enchanted object. An object that has been very precisely enchanted for a specific purpose. I would suspect that Muggles could travel by both Floo Powder and by Portkey. But I suspect that Portkeys have additional protective enchantments built into them. Let's look at some Portkey examples, the Portkey they used from the top of Stoad Hill, was a manky old boot and was set to activate at a very precise time. In that case, I'm guessing that once the time passed and the Portkey expired, it would revert back to a manky old boot and nothing more. Being a very common and unappealing object, it is unlikely that muggles would mess with it. Also, it was placed in a very remote location, that while accessable, would not be likely to have muggle there at the precise activation time of the Portkey. So we see several safety methods and protection that would prevent it from actually working with a muggle. Having said that, I think if a wizard intended to transport a muggle, it could be done. Most protections are to prevent accidental muggle transport. >From the Tri-Wizards maze, the cup/portkey was activated by touch. Generally, that's not a very safe method as far as accidental muggle transport is concern, but it was used in a very protected environment. Not likely for a stray muggle to come wandering through the maze, and touch the portkey. The portkey of Harry and the Weasleys from Hogwarts to Grimauld Place, and the transport of Harry from the Ministry back to Dumbledore office were activated on Dumbledore command via a count of three. In a sense, it was activated by Dumbledore's willfull intent. So that would not produce a portkey that could accidentally be used by a muggle; not magical intent available to activate it. In summary, I personally think you can tranport muggle by Portkey if you desire to do so, but in most cases, there are sufficient protections to prevent accidental transports. > Wendy continues: > > ... And what about broomsticks? Is the enchantment on the broom > enough to keep a Muggle afloat, or does the person riding it need > magic as well, to make it work? > bboy_mn: Again, a very tough call; I can only speculate. First, I think wizard are extremely careful NOT to let enchanted object laying around where muggles can find them. On the other hand, Mr. Weasley's entire job is based pretty much on fixing that when it happens; he corrects encounters between muggles and enchanted objects. I suspect most of it he handles on his own, and when it reaches disasterous proportions, he calls in the Obliviator Squads to handle it. So, it would be extremely rare for a broom to fall into the hands of a muggle. If that did happen, it would be unlikely for the muggle to even think of riding it. However, there is sufficient muggle witch lore available that a muggle might try to ride a broom as a joke. What happens then? Hummmm..... One thought comes to me, when Harry gets his new broom, it seems to be sensitive to him; it hovers at just the right mounting height, for example. So while I believe the flying magic is in the broom, I have to think, or at least hope, that some kind of enchantment has been added to sense the magical abilities of the rider. Can't prove that, but it seems logical. > Wendy: > > I'm also curious about how Muggles would fit into the Wizarding > justice system (such as it is). ...edited... > > Looking forward to hearing some thoughts about these things. :-) > > > Cheers! > Wendy bboy_mn: Again, another difficult question. I think we must assume that people who commit crimes in the magical world, must know about that magical world or they could have never gotten into it. I don't think too many muggles take a wrong turn on Charring Cross road and end up in Diagon Alley, or that a couple Soccer Hooligans accidentally stumble into the Leaky Cauldron. Just don't see that happening. So, for the crime to occur in the magic world, the person would have to be very knowledgable of the magic world, and in that case, would be subject to the full impact of magical law. A different scenerio would be the commission of a crime against a magical person that occurs in the muggle world. It seems that most magical people live hidden amoung muggle. Malfoys, for Example, live in Whiltshire. Dedalus Diggle lives in Kent. The Black family appears to have lived in North London. I think most wizards would envoke a degree of street justice in that circumstance. If you were dumb enough to break into a wizard's home or tryi and mug one on the street, I think the punishment would be immediate, swift, and sure. If you managed to kill a wizard in a violent attack, cause extreme harm to them, or created a similar circumstance that demanded that authorities be called, I'm not sure what would happen. Maybe the Ministry would get the Prime Minister to pull some strings and get the 'Bobbies' to chase after them. Despite seeming to have an endless well of half baked theories, this one has me somewhat stumped. Just a few thoughts. bboy_mn From risako at nexusanime.com Sun Nov 16 08:26:42 2003 From: risako at nexusanime.com (Melissa McCarthy) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 04:26:42 -0400 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggles in the Wizarding World References: Message-ID: <00ac01c3ac1b$5d8fb760$6401a8c0@vaio> No: HPFGUIDX 85148 Ooh, good questions! I'm going to take a stab at a couple; the last is just too much for my poor tired head! Wendy: > Mostly, I'm wondering about Muggles interacting with the Wizarding > World. We know that they can get into Diagon Alley somehow > (Hermione's parents are there in CoS), but *how*? Could they have > gotten through the entrance without Hermione and her wand? I doubt that they could have simply wandered through the entrance. There's been a theory on the list before that the normal procedure for new Hogwarts students with Muggle families is to give them a sort of wizarding advisor to deal with getting into Diagon Alley, changing their money, shopping for supplies, and so forth. If that's the case, the advisor could get the whole family in. Wendy: > I'm also curious about transporation. Obviously, Muggles can't > apparate. It appears that not even all wizards can apparate. But > what about Floo Powder? Is it the powder that holds the magic (in > which case a Muggle should be able to use it), or does the hand that > throws the powder need to have magic, as well (in which case, > Muggles would just get very warm and not go anywhere if they tried > to travel by Floo)? Floo Powder seems to be inherently magical. In GoF, Harry doesn't really know how to use Floo Powder and it still works (not so well, because he coughed and stuttered, but it still works). He didn't do anything magical; he didn't do anything at all except step into the fire and say where he wanted to go. It's possible -- and seems likely to me -- that the person putting the Floo Powder into the fire has to be magical or do something magical to activate it, but that once it's activated, anyone who can speak can use it. Wendy: > Same question for Portkeys - it is the > Portkey that is magical, or it is the combination of Portkey and > magical person that matters? I tend to think that anyone could > travel by Portkey (including Muggles). I'm less certain that Floo > could be used by Muggles, though. Again, since the Portkey seems to work on its own without any action by the person(s) being transported, it seems to me that anyone could use it. Wendy: > And what about broomsticks? Is the > enchantment on the broom enough to keep a Muggle afloat, or does the > person riding it need magic as well, to make it work? The fact that Hogwarts students need to take broomstick lessons suggests that it's not as simple as hopping onto a broom and taking off. Perhaps a broom enchanted specifically to start when a person is seated on it, rise, fly to a specific place, dodging obstacles automatically, and land carefully would work for a Muggle, but other than that, there seems to be a good deal of magical skill involved in riding a broom. Melissa, up way past her bedtime (blame any illogical statements on that!) From catlady at wicca.net Sun Nov 16 10:35:43 2003 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 10:35:43 -0000 Subject: AurorAlice/ThePortraits/Monks/Lucius/Phineas/JamesSnitch/SumHols/Houses/Flush Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85149 Sigma Librae: Zubenhakrabi or Zubenalakrab : "the scorpion's claw" (To add to the confusion, early in that century Elijah Burritt coupled the name "Zubenhakrabi" to Eta Librae) (http://www.astro.uiuc.edu/~kaler/sow/zubenh.html and http://www.ras.ucalgary.ca/~gibson/starnames/starnames.html?o=0 ) Elfundeb wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84467 : << In GoF, there is absolutely no mention that Alice was an Auror. Crouch states that the Lestranges et al. were accused of "capturing an Auror -- Frank Longbottom -- and subjecting him to the Cruciatus Curse" and further accused "of using the Cruciatus Curse on Frank Longbottom's wife." Dumbledore says later when Harry asks whether they were talking about Neville's parents, "His father, Frank, was an Auror just like Professor Moody. He and his wife were tortured for information about Voldemort's whereabouts after he lost his powers, as you heard." In OoP, on the other hand, they were both described as Aurors. The difference is so striking, I'm left with the nagging feeling that Alice was promoted between books. >> After GoF, many people, including me, were under the impression that both Neville's parents were Aurors, and canon-purists on list kept 'correcting' us that canon didn't say whether Neville's (as yet unnamed) mother was an Auror or not. OoP stated that both Frank and Alice Longbottom were Aurors. I believe that that was JKR's intention all along -- that us careless readers picked up on her *intention* rather than her words. The same for ferocious Lily Evans defender of the weak and feisty prankster Ginny Weasley the Quidditch ace. Paula wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84465 : << Where is there any canon for this? I can't recall any canon that specifically explains the process and/or spells that an artist used to paint a portrait. That's why I think that the portrait is simply a vehicle for the departed to continue to function in this world. >> Someone posted that one of the extras on the CoS DVD (which I don't have) is an interview in which JKR explains that the magical portraits are made by a process that involves spells and using some bodily part/fluid of the model mixed in the paint. It would be wonderful if some saintly person transcribed that explanation and posted it ... Just Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84510 : << But what about the portrait of Sir Cadogan? Surely he was a wizard--if not, what is his portrait doing in Hogwarts? Or maybe the paintings, which include one of a group of monks, are enchanted muggle artifacts? Monkhood and wizardry don't seem to go together. >> As for monkhood and magic, the Hufflepuff ghost is named the Fat Friar. IIRC Sir Nick indicated that you have to be a wizard to become a ghost. I don't know if magical paintings can be paintings of Muggles; I don't know if magical paintings can be paintings of fictional characters ... maybe 'fictional' isn't quite the right word, but in my fanfic, I had a painting of The Judgement of Paris, whose Aphrodite was quite sympathetic and helpful to under-age couples seeking a private place to have sex: she had the personality of a diminished Aphrodite, not that of the model who enabled the painter to get the muscles right for her pose... I like to think that Sir Cadogan is a fictional character. Steve bboy_mn wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84497 : << The reason Lucius can't see this is because he is blinded by the wealth, power, and status he thinks being in Voldemort's top echelon will bring him. Sadly, once Voldemort is in power, and Lucius discovers that his life of priviledge is really the priviledge to be tortured by Voldemort on a whim, and spending the rest of his life kiss the scalely backide of a dictator while the wizard world and it's economy deteriorate into the worst depression in wizarding history, it will be too late to do anything about it. >> Steve, as you know, I believe that the reason that Lucius is not concerned about living in a world controlled (i.e. ruined) by LV is that Lucius thinks *he* controls LV, and will prevent LV from doing all those things he wants to do. I wonder if LV knows what Lucius is up to; I wonder if Lucius, about to back-stab LV, will be surprised that LV back-stabs him first? Berit wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84614 : << > I've looked up www.behindthename.com , and see that the > name "Phineas" could mean "serpent's mouth" in Hebrew (or stem from > old Egyptian meaning "Nubian", black?). There seems to be a lot of > enlightened people on this list, so I wonder if anyone has more > background information on the former Slytherin Headmaster's first > name... >> Phineas is a variant of Pinhas which is Pa-Nehasi which is Egyptian for 'the Nubian', like some people nowdays are named Scot and Dane and Norman. Nigellus is Latin for 'Neil' but often thought to come from Latin 'niger' meaning 'black'. (http://www.behindthename.com/ is one of many great resources, but look up Nigel rather than Nigellus.) To me it seems obvious that JKR intended to name that character Black Black Black (altho' I would have preferred her to do so without involving ethnicity) and I went to some effort to figure out related names for his children: Ciaran Cole and Melanie Maura. However, the belief that Phineas means 'serpent's mouth' in Hebrew seems to be so widespread that well-informed JKR must know of it, so perhaps she is building up to dear Phineas Nigellus being a parselmouth. Iggy McSnurd wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84629 : << And why was he shown in OotP playing with the snitch the way he was? >> Besides the answer people have made, that a Snitch is more convenient to show off agility with than a Quaffle, a while ago there was a suggestion that James Potter's inherited fortune may have started with Bowman Wright (of *Godric's Hollow*) who invented the Golden Snitch, in which case he may have been playing with it to remind people of his wealth. I think I am the only person who suggested that *Lily* might have been the Seeker from whom Harry inherited his talent (that would explain why James doodled a Golden Snitch around her initials), so he was using to try to catch her attention in particular. Just Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84692 : << Which brings up another question we could ask Rowling without spoiling the plot: Do Hogwarts teachers stay at the school during the summer? And what do they do when the students are gone? (You can spend only so much time making lesson plans and rereading the textbooks, especially if you've been teaching the same subject for fourteen years or more. My apologies if this question has been asked and answered before. >> The Goat Pad http://www.angelfire.com/magic/aberforthsgoat/index.html found me http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/0700-swns-alfie.htm which contains: Q: Where do the Hogwarts teachers live during the school holidays ? Do they stay at Hogwarts ? (Andrew Zimmer) A: No, they don't. Filch, the caretaker, stays. Cheekyweebisom wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84749 : << Furthermore, children's qualities aren't necessarily inherited -- in the case of the Weasleys, I'd probably agree with you, but in general, I think it's too much of a blanket statement. Sirius is a perfect example, as his character seems to be comprised almost entirely of deliberate efforts to be contrary to his parents' racist, archaic, and generally dreadful views. I can't come up with any other examples, probably because we see so few parent/children relationships. >> The gracious and chivalrous Cedric Diggory and his ungracious, snarky father? Hermowninny wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84757 : << I can't see anyone wanting to be in Hufflepuff, but maybe that's where the sorting hat puts those who can't decide themselves. >> I think Cedric would have been in Gryffindor except that he wanted to be in Hufflepuff, for family tradition or to please his father. Troels wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84874 : << the Order of the Phoenix. Of the members we know or strongly suspect the house of, at least 6 were in Gryffindor (or are strongly suspected thereof), only one was never at Hogwarts, and only one was in Slytherin. >> Gryffindors: Dumbledore, Sirius, Remus, Peter, James, Lily, Arthur, Molly, Bill, Charlie. Slytherin: Snape. Never at Hogwarts: are you assuming that Arabella must not have gone to Hogwarts, just because she's a Squib? I find that a reasonable assumption, but not canon. Eric Oppen wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84876 : << As far as I can remember, we never find out _which_ House Dolores Umbridge was in during her time at Hogwarts. For that matter, if she hadn't mentioned being happy to be _back_ at Hogwarts, I'd have to say that we wouldn't know for sure if she even _was_ a Hogwarts Old Girl. She _could_ have been educated at Beauxbatons, Durmstrang, the Salem Witches' Institute, or one of the smaller schools in Europe. >> *sigh* *here I go again* The Salem Witches' Institute is *not* a school, or Harry would have seen schoolgirls as well as middle-aged witches hanging out under its banner. Surely the Witches' Institute is a club for rural housewives, a pun on the Women's Institute in Britain. (See http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=561511693 and http://www.womens-institute.co.uk/ ) << Harry, being young and highly partisan, does tend to think of the Slytherins as all-evil, but I doubt that they all are...or, for that matter, that the DEs are all Slytherin Old Boys and Old Girls. >> We've heard a lot of people who lived through Vold War I tell us that one could never tell who could be trusted. If all the followers of LV were Slytherins, then it would have been easier to know that the non-Slytherins could be trusted. I suppose Hagrid could defend his generalization (that there wasn't a witch or wizard who went bad who hadn't been in Slytherin) against some example of So-and-So who was a Hufflepuff (for example) and sent to Azkaban for participating in the ambus and murder of some Aurors (I made that up) by saying "She must have been under Imperius. Stupid Ministry never convicts the right people." Just Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84826 : << There were no flush toilets in the days of Salazar Slytherin, (snip) trying not to think about Moaning Myrtle being flushed down to the lake with the sewage, or the resulting pollution of the lake >> I always say, in the Potterverse, the wizarding folk had indoor plumbing with hot and cold running water and flush toilets ever since Atlantis. All the various Muggles who 'invented' indoor plumbing (Minoans, Romans, 18th century, etc) were really trying to copy what they had seen when a guest in a wizarding home. Also, the wizarding folk had elaborate castles ever since Atlantis, so it doesn't matter that Muggle 'castles' were IIRC wooden huts surrounded by a muddy ditch and a picket fence at the time of the Founders. I personally don't believe in Atlantis or primordial matriarchies, but I also don't believe in flying carpets or House Elves. A large part of the gimmick of the Potterverse is that many things which are familiar folklore or fantasy motifs which every reader *knows* aren't real, *are* real (altho' often garbled) in the Potterverse. So I think I'm tremendously amusing to add Atlantis and primordial matriarchies to the list of things that Muggles are too stupid to believe in. *** I believe that their plumbing empties into the lake via a magical cleaning spell that transmutes all the waste products into pretty flowers or such, but I fear that that mgical cleaning spell was put in place by the lake's inhabitants, such as the merpeople, rather than by the castle's occupants. Even tho' I believe that wizards have had indoor plumbing with hot and cold running water and flush toilets for over nine thousand years, I have no evidence that medieval wizards had a higher concern for clean drinking water and pleasant smelling surroundings than their Muggle contemporaries did. *** I believe that Potterverse wizarding folk have had late twentieth century indoor plumbing and Renaissance 'replica' castles since back before Atlantis sank. They didn't need to know any plumbing, hydraulics, metallurgy, stonecarving, or architecture because they made their bathrooms and castles by MAGIC! However, Muggles who visted wizards and saw the nice things the wizards had, had to invent all that technology in order to imitate the wizarding goodies. There is a long history of Muggles trying to imitate wizarding plumbing: Minoan, Classical Roman, etc. The wizarding folk teach their children a lot of self-enhancing falsehoods. For example, they teach their children that the reason to keep magic secret from Muggles is to avoid being pestered by Muggles wanting favors (and Hagrid, not having completed his education, still believes that), when in reality the wizarding folk went into hiding because they were scared of the Muggles attacking them. Another example is that they teach their children that Muggles use technology to imitate what wizards do by magic. Technology probably *started* that way, Muggles trying to figure out how to make bathrooms and castles and swords like the wizards had ... this may have remained true up to the Steam Age, with Muggles inventing horseless carriages to imitate the (apparently) horseless carriages that carry students from Hogsmeade Station to Hogwarts, inventing railroads to imitate wizarding self-propelled wagons like at Gringotts, gaslight to imitate the magical self-lighting candles on the wall of wizarding houses ... but by then the discovery and invention of science and technology had become self-propelling themselves, and with Electricity, Muggles went on to invent things that the wizarding folk copy. The Wizarding Wireless Network is obviously an imitation of Muggle radio, because it's named after "wireles", the British Muggle name for radio. The wizarding folk would have no other reason to name it "wireless", because they didn't have a preceeding technology named "wire" (the telegraph). The kindly condescension to Muggles shown by the older Weasleys IS a little off. They say, isn't it marvellous that Muggles and their cute little toys are able to make do without magic? One common Muggle cute little toy, the telephone, can send a message a great deal faster than an owl! Other listies have mentioned Muggle bombs that blow up a great deal more than one street and twelve people. From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Nov 16 11:03:33 2003 From: patientx3 at aol.com (HunterGreen) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 11:03:33 -0000 Subject: The Good Slytherin - Stringy & Weedy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85150 Wendy wrote: >... I think the boy who could see the Thestrels is Blaise Zabini, >who got sorted into Slytherin in Harry's first year. bboy_mn: [snip] >When Hagrid introduces the Thestrals, the Slytherin boy who can see >them is described as, "... a stringy Slytherin boy standing just >behind Goyle...". Later after the Qibler article has come out, Harry >sees Malfoy and friend in the library (Pg515 UK HB) > >-OotP - Scene - Hogwarts Library - > >He saw them (Malfoy and friends) with their heads togehter later >that afternoon in the Library, they were with a weedy-looking boy >Hermione whispered was called Theordore Nott. > > -end quote- > >Thestral Boy = stringy >Theodore Nott = weedy >Both are in close proximity to Goyle, and therefore Malfoy. Although >the proximity in the Library is far more critical than in the forest >during the Thestral lesson. > > "Stringy" and "weedy"; both seem to imply thin. So I don't know if we can reach a solid conclusion from the information we have. HunterGreen: I'm on the side that the boy ISN'T Theodore, but I checked Nott's introduction in GoF, and something caught my eye: [from chpt. 33, 'the death eaters'] '"The same goes for you, Nott," said Voldemort quietly as he walked past a stooped figure in Mr. Goyle's shadow. "My Lord, I prostrate myself before you, I am your most faithful -" ' Both the thestral boy and Nott Sr. are in Goyle's shadow (albeit a different generation of Goyle)-which would be an interesting way to tie father and son together if it is indeed Theodore. Also, it appears that Nott is at least more intelligent than Crabbe and Goyle who only grunt at Voldemort. This could have passed on to Theodore, maybe that's why he's not one of Draco's little followers. Personally, my favorite theory about the thestral boy was suggested a few months ago (can't remember who said it), that he's Snape's possible son because him and Pensieve!Snape are both described as 'stringy'. HunterGreen. From silmariel at telefonica.net Sun Nov 16 15:40:45 2003 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 16:40:45 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Howgarts Clubs ( was Ignorance and the toad) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200311161640.45747.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85151 Nora Renka: > So pooh on the movies for adding in something that should be > conspicuous in its absence! The grand traditions of Muggle music > are something the WW seems to be missing... There are a lot of things that seem to be missing just because they don't enter in Harry's world. I don't have OoP with me, but I remember a student (a girl) being described as being in all sort of clubs, included something like the Charms Club. It opens a lot of possibilities, giving there are groups of students whose activities have been completely ignored by Harry during more than four years, and sort of gives a base for the chorus. I haven't gone OT, have I? Sorry if I did. The fact is I was pleased to discover that Howgarts had more life inside it that I had previously known. Silmariel From belijako at online.no Sun Nov 16 14:39:02 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 14:39:02 -0000 Subject: AurorAlice/ThePortraits/Monks/Lucius/Phineas/JamesSnitch/SumHols/Houses/Flush In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85152 Catlady wrote: > Phineas is a variant of Pinhas which is Pa-Nehasi which is Egyptian > for 'the Nubian', like some people nowadays are named Scot and Dane > and Norman. Nigellus is Latin for 'Neil' but often thought to come > from Latin 'niger' meaning 'black'. (http://www.behindthename.com/ > > However, the belief that Phineas means 'serpent's mouth' in Hebrew > seems to be so widespread that well-informed JKR must know of it, so > perhaps she is building up to dear Phineas Nigellus being a parselmouth. Me: Thank you for your answer! This is what I am thinking too: Even though "Phineas" is Egyptian for the "Nubian", Rowling would be aware that it is a common notion that it stems from Hebrew meaning "Serpent's mouth" (or "big-mouth"). I'm not so sure this is supposed to be a clue that Rowling's Phineas was a parseltongue though... According to Tom M. Riddle, he and Harry were "probably the only two parselmouths to come to Hogwarts since Slytherin himself." (CoS p.233, Brit.Vers.) Phineas has been at Hogwarts, at least as a headmaster. Of course this doesn't have to rule out Phineas being one, since what Tom is saying is that HE doesn't know of anyone else. The question is whether Tom would have known if Phineas was one... But, it is an intriguing thought :-) My thoughts about his name is that it is very much linked to his Slytherin house (and heritage?). In many ways Phineas is portrayed as the "ultimate" Slytherin: His name is very much so, a direct reference to his house, and his clothes are painted in the Slytherin colours of silver and green; his demeanour and mindset are very much Slytherin: "We Slytherin's are brave, yes, but not stupid. For instance, given the choice, we will always choose to save our own necks first." (OoP p. 437) Berit From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Nov 16 16:03:03 2003 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 16 Nov 2003 16:03:03 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1068998583.26.64992.m8@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85154 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, November 16, 2003 Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CST (GMT-06:00) Hi everyone! Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. *Chat times are not changing for Daylight Saving/Summer Time.* Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. Go into any Yahoo chat room and type /join HP:1 For further info, see the Humongous BigFile, section 3.3. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/hbfile.html#33 Hope to see you there! From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Sun Nov 16 16:33:55 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 11:33:55 -0500 Subject: Predictions-Plot devises in 6 & 7 Message-ID: <00bc01c3ac5f$6de8cdb0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85155 There are some things we have seen mentioned or used in small ways, that I think will be big plot devises used in the next two books. 1. Veritaserum- We've seen this in OotP, when Harry wouldn't drink it and in GoF with Fake Moody. What we haven't seen is it used in a way that does damage to the "good guys". Someone making Tonks, Mrs. Weasley, Ron, or Harry spill their guts. I can't believe JKR invented this powerful potion not to eventually use it like this. 2. Imperius curse- We've heard about this since the first book. It was used slightly in OotP, but I feel it's the same as my example above. Why have this be one of three unforgivable curses if it isn't going to be used in a big way. My bet is Ron being made to do some pretty despicable things, but it could be anyone. Maybe even Harry will be used in this way. That way we would get a first person account of what it feels like to fall under this curse. I know he threw it off with Fake Moody, but what if Voldemrt cast it himself? 3.Lupin being a werewolf- Hopefully Moony will be able to use this in a good way for once in his life. It's such a big thing, I can't believe we'll never see him turn into a werewolf again. I see him as being a hero eventually. 4. Colin's pictures- Seems like a small thing, but I've always been suspicious of him taking all those pictures. I know it was so he was annoying to Harry so everyone would think he had him petrified, but I think there's more to it. I think he's going to capture something important one of these days, or maybe he already has, and doesn't even know it. Maybe he'll catch Snape talking to someone he shouldn't be talking to. These are all just wild speculations. We all have them, and I'd love to hear some of yours. Feel free to rip mine to shreds. Joj From owlery2003 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 16:36:22 2003 From: owlery2003 at yahoo.com (Scott Santangelo) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 08:36:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031116163622.91262.qmail@web60107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85156 Geoff Bannister wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, B Arrowsmith wrote: Kneasy: So, what would be your odds for a happy ending? All in all, the circumstances of his genesis do not hold out a great deal of hope - particularly the train journey; in the UK they are so bad they generally promote rage and an inclination to kill, *kill*, KILL! I think it's thumbs down for Harry; 3:1 he doesn't make it. Geoff: I think, Dementors and Malfoy apart, Harry's experiences on the Hogwarts Express have been reasonably good in terms of the actual rail journey. My own experiences on UK railways, mainly longer distance journeys, have been pretty good in recent years. I dearly want to see Mark Evans revealed as Harry's long lost something-or-other..... I dearly want to see Harry survive. Never mind the golden sunsets and the fields of swaying flowers. Survive will suffice. I dearly want to see England wipe the floor with France in the Rugby World Cup final; I wonder if an excellent Quidditch Seeker might help their chances? Portkey for Harry to Sydney anyone? --------------------------- Far from canon, but I think if Warner Bros. picked-up the HP series, I can't imagine they would have bought into a kids-oriented movie franchise wherein the hero bites it in the end. The movie execs had to know from the outset how it all turns out. From what I've read, JKR has input into the films, so even though they deviate from the actual books, I tend to believe they must be accurate as to key plot elements, so even though there are cries of "movie contamination" it would seem they must conform to JKR's vision/approval. Far from scientific, but I think it's the best assurance of a "happy ending" of some sort! Owlery2003 --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lliannanshe_ensueno at verizon.net Sun Nov 16 16:47:42 2003 From: lliannanshe_ensueno at verizon.net (Lliannanshe) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 16:47:42 -0000 Subject: Predictions-Plot devises in 6 & 7 In-Reply-To: <00bc01c3ac5f$6de8cdb0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85157 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" wrote: > There are some things we have seen mentioned or used in small ways, that I > think will be big plot devises used in the next two books. > > 1. Veritaserum- We've seen this in OotP, when Harry wouldn't drink it and > in GoF with Fake Moody. What we haven't seen is it used in a way that does > damage to the "good guys". Someone making Tonks, Mrs. Weasley, Ron, or > Harry spill their guts. I can't believe JKR invented this powerful potion > not to eventually use it like this. > > 2. Imperius curse- We've heard about this since the first book. It was > used slightly in OotP, but I feel it's the same as my example above. Why > have this be one of three unforgivable curses if it isn't going to be used > in a big way. My bet is Ron being made to do some pretty despicable things, > but it could be anyone. Maybe even Harry will be used in this way. That > way we would get a first person account of what it feels like to fall under > this curse. I know he threw it off with Fake Moody, but what if Voldemrt > cast it himself? > > 3.Lupin being a werewolf- Hopefully Moony will be able to use this in a > good way for once in his life. It's such a big thing, I can't believe we'll > never see him turn into a werewolf again. I see him as being a hero > eventually. > > 4. Colin's pictures- Seems like a small thing, but I've always been > suspicious of him taking all those pictures. I know it was so he was > annoying to Harry so everyone would think he had him petrified, but I think > there's more to it. I think he's going to capture something important one > of these days, or maybe he already has, and doesn't even know it. Maybe > he'll catch Snape talking to someone he shouldn't be talking to. > > These are all just wild speculations. We all have them, and I'd love to > hear some of yours. Feel free to rip mine to shreds. > > Joj 5. Switching Spells - 4 off hand mentions since book 1 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/66362 Lliannanshe From Zarleycat at aol.com Sun Nov 16 16:56:14 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 16:56:14 -0000 Subject: Endings In-Reply-To: <86AEF35E-17A4-11D8-B255-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85158 Kneasy wrote: > Preferences for the ending vary depending on the opacity of one's > rose-tinted spectacles. Some see Harry (plus partner) romping off into > a golden-hazed future; the meadows ablaze with wild flowers, bluebirds > twittering overhead, into a truly magical sunset with everything > perfection. > > Those steeped in the lore of folklore appreciate that there are damn > few epics where everybody lives happily ever after. With alarming > frequency the one person who doesn't get to enjoy a ripe old age is > the hero. He gets a holiday named after him instead (and wasn't that > mentioned at the beginning of PS/SS? Hmm. Harry Potter Day. I wonder). > > Others, more cynical, suspect that JKR may not tie up all the loose > ends as promised. After all, a sequel or two might not be a total > disaster, right? > > Just for a moment, let's put aside analyses of the plot, fascinating as > they are, and consider HP from a slightly different angle. Is it > possible that the genesis of of Harry Potter could be an influence on > the ending? > > We all know the place; a train between London and Scotland. > We all know the circumstances; mother of a young child and times aren't > easy. > We all know that the story appeared almost miraculously complete - the > end was known at the beginning. > We all know that international stardom was not envisaged. JKR hoped to > sell a few thousand copies, enough to supplement her income - a local > story for a local audience. > We all know she is not going to change the plot just to please her > audience. > We all know that JKR is quiet, reserved, almost introverted, definitely > not the extrovert optimist type. > We all know JKR claims to be brutal; kill 'em off if necessary. > > So, what would be your odds for a happy ending? > All in all, the circumstances of his genesis do not hold out a great > deal of hope - particularly the train journey; in the UK they are so > bad they generally promote rage and an inclination to kill, *kill*, > KILL! > > I think it's thumbs down for Harry; 3:1 he doesn't make it. > I think Harry will live, but that he will lose his magical powers. (And I'm sure others have suggested this before I have!) Harry is a character who has spent a lot of his life feeling like he simply doesn't fit. He was never treated as a full member of the Dursley family in his younger years. And, once he was told he was a wizard, that caused even more alientation with his non-magical relatives. Coming late as Harry did to the wizard world, he felt out of place there, too. Even more so once he realized that everyone in that world knew who he was. However, as his school years went by, he became more comfortable in this world, and felt that he belonged there. Now, at the end of OoP, Harry again feels alienation, because of what the prophecy tells him. I can see JKR stripping him of his magic powers, in some final battle with V., but letting Harry live, thus keeping Warner Brothers happy by not killing off the hero of the story. Harry will be the hero who vanishes from the world he saved, remaining behind only in story or myth. He'll no longer be part of the wizard world, but will never truly feel part of the muggle world, either. Marianne From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Sun Nov 16 17:00:37 2003 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:00:37 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Predictions-Plot devises in 6 & 7 Message-ID: <11.1c6b2140.2ce90735@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85159 joj: > > There are some things we have seen mentioned or used in small ways, that I > think will be big plot devises used in the next two books. > > 1. Veritaserum- We've seen this in OotP, when Harry wouldn't drink it and > in GoF with Fake Moody. What we haven't seen is it used in a way that does > damage to the "good guys". Someone making Tonks, Mrs. Weasley, Ron, or > Harry spill their guts. I can't believe JKR invented this powerful potion > not to eventually use it like this. Actually, I'd like to see it used on Snape. Or Snape doing the administering. I can just see it.. Voldemort: Have you finished the veritaserum? Good. Now drink it. > > 2. Imperius curse- I know he threw it off with Fake Moody, but what if > Voldemrt > cast it himself? He did. Remember the graveyard scene? Voldemort put Harry under the Imperius Curse and told him to "Just say 'no'" > > 3.Lupin being a werewolf- Hopefully Moony will be able to use this in a > good way for once in his life. It's such a big thing, I can't believe we'll > never see him turn into a werewolf again. I see him as being a hero > eventually. > > 4. Colin's pictures- Seems like a small thing, but I've always been > suspicious of him taking all those pictures. I know it was so he was > annoying to Harry so everyone would think he had him petrified, but I think > there's more to it. I think he's going to capture something important one > of these days, or maybe he already has, and doesn't even know it. Maybe > he'll catch Snape talking to someone he shouldn't be talking to. > These I like. I've thought about Lupin's Lycanthropy coming more into play somehow myself. I also agree that it may be used in a 'good' way next time. After all, the 'wrong' moment has already been used. Maybe I'm not thinking of all the possibilities, but right now I can't picture a 'wrong' moment without imagining the characters getting dejavu. ~Cassie~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Sun Nov 16 17:03:49 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:03:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) References: Message-ID: <011301c3ac63$9afbd140$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85160 Geoff: But as someone pointed out, although Harry is green eyed in the book, Dainel Radcliffe didn't wear contact lenses. Possibly he is allergic to them. Some people can't wear them. Let's hope it doesn't cause a clash between a future movie and the books. Joj:I guess it depends on if it matters that his eyes are green, or that they're green just like his mother's. If it only matters that he has his mothers eyes, she could have blue eyes in the movie. If it matters that they are green, well then, that's another story. Slytherin's are symbolized by the color green, but who really knows what JKR has in that wonderful head of hers. Joj [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Sun Nov 16 17:12:23 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 12:12:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Endings References: Message-ID: <011a01c3ac64$cdb71260$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85161 Marianne said: I can see JKR stripping him of his magic powers, in some final battle with V., but letting Harry live, thus keeping Warner Brothers happy by not killing off the hero of the story. Joj: I'm sorry, but I don't think JKR gives a rats ass what would make Warner Brothers happy. I think she has known all along how this series will end. I'm sure some small things will and have changed (killing Moody off for example), but I can't imagine she would change something as enormous as whether Harry lives or dies for anybody! Joj, who apologizes if she has offended you. :-) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From o_caipora at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 17:29:36 2003 From: o_caipora at yahoo.com (o_caipora) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:29:36 -0000 Subject: Howgarts Clubs ( was Ignorance and the Toad) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85162 "Nora Renka" wrote: > faculty advisor, and everything. :) But not to flog a dead horse, > a chorus is the kind of thing that takes directorial expertise, Small schools and churches all over the world have choruses, and generations of schoolboys have sung "The Ballad of Eskimo Nell" without any adult direction, and indeed in spite of it. Many universities have glee clubs or other singing groups (such as the Wiffenpoofs) that are entirely student run. Home singing and piano playing were vastly more popular before record players. Students without ipods, cd players, and Napster may be more inclined than their Muggle peers to make music themselves. The ability to sing is surely no less in wizards than in muggles, and with no instruments involved, enchanted or otherwise, it's an area in which the WW and the rest of us would have least grown apart. > we've had absolutely no indication that there's anyone at Hogwarts > with that skill, or inclination. It's one of those things that can be fun even when done badly. > Painting wouldn't surprise me that > much (although there's an incipient sidethread in here about what > having magical things available does to the development of painting > techniques), There was a controvery a few years ago about the possible use by Renassaince painters of some sort of "magic lantern" device to project an image on the canvas, simplifying considerably the learning of the laws of perspective. No doubt real magic would have similar effects, though I can't imagine just what. > -Nora also notes that there's probably no way the WW has opera, and > therefore would never want to live in it There's a real-wold argument made in favor of state financing of things like ballet and opera that require a lot of people to dedicate years of study: if they must rely on fluctuating private support, a few lean years ends careers and kills the living tradition by which skills are handed on. Note that Prospero just conjures up a magical masque/ballet, but that's not the same as an opera company. Is this the sort of thing where the WW relies on Muggles? Elderly Wizards disguised as Muggles would surely pass unnoticed in comparison with many dedicated opera buffs. - Caipora (who thinks Nora has hit on something important about the restrictions of a limited community, but who can live without Wagner) From belijako at online.no Sun Nov 16 17:50:04 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:50:04 -0000 Subject: Endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85163 Marianne wrote: I can see JKR stripping Harry of his magic powers, in some final battle with V., but letting Harry live, thus keeping Warner Brothers happy by not killing off the hero of the story. Harry will be the hero who vanishes from the world he saved, remaining behind only in story or myth. He'll no longer be part of the wizard world, but will never truly feel part of the muggle world, either. Me: I can't believe anybody can see such an ending coming :-) It would be downright cruel of Rowling to throw Harry a fate like that. Death would be much more merciful if you ask me. So no, I don't think Rowling will end her books like that :-) Berit http://home.no.net/berjakob/snape.html From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 17:31:37 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:31:37 -0000 Subject: Questioning the Lexicon yet again: Marauder's Map In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85164 > hp_lexicon" wrote: > > > The map is called The Marauder's Map. That's singular. It refers to > > one person, whomever happens to be using the map to "maraud." If it > > was intended to refer to the four, it would be called The > Marauders' > > Map. > > > Steve Vander Ark > > The Harry Potter Lexicon > Yolanda responded: > "Marauder's Map" is singular, but like you said whomever referred to > it would be using it to "maraud" and would therefore be, for the > moment anyway, a "Marauder". > > Since it is safe to assume that all four of them used the map at some > point, we know that they were all "marauders" at some time. > Yolanda Carol: Good response, Yolanda. Not to mention that "the Marauders" is a convenient, easily identifiable term for James and Company, just like "the Trio" (which isn't canonical, either) for Harry, Ron, and Hermione. If we don't use "the Marauders," we're reduced to listing all four names or coming up with an HRH-style acronym like JSRP (not exactly memorable or clever). So I hope we'll be forgiven for continuing to use the term(s) even though JKR doesn't. (BTW, HRH always makes me think of Her Royal Highness--and I'm American!) Carol From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 16 18:21:53 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:21:53 -0000 Subject: Endings In-Reply-To: <011a01c3ac64$cdb71260$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85165 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" wrote: > > Marianne said: > I can see JKR stripping him of his magic powers, in some final battle > with V., but letting Harry live, thus keeping Warner Brothers happy > by not killing off the hero of the story. > > Joj: I'm sorry, but I don't think JKR gives a rats ass what would make Warner Brothers happy. I think she has known all along how this series will end. I'm sure some small things will and have changed (killing Moody off for example), but I can't imagine she would change something as enormous as whether Harry lives or dies for anybody! > That tends to be my opinion too. JKR has a whim of iron, *nobody* will get her to change her mind. With a bit of luck it will be FEATHERBOAS all round. I do enjoy a good bloodbath. Also, do Warners have a contract to film the books yet to come? I don't think they do, which makes things even more interesting. Get ready to watch a major studio scramble for the exit if Harry cops it in the neck. Kneasy From rredordead at aol.com Sun Nov 16 19:59:31 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 19:59:31 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85166 > Carolyn wrote: > Thanks Geoff, I missed that one ! So, just we're left with the > puzzle > over Harry's green eyes. Jen Reese has again pointed out the canon > for them apparently being important, so maybe its just something > JKR > could not influence in the movie. > Geoff wrote: > But as someone pointed out, although Harry is green eyed in the book, > Dainel Radcliffe didn't wear contact lenses. Possibly he is allergic > to them. Some people can't wear them. Let's hope it doesn't cause a > clash between a future movie and the books. Now me: I do remember seeing movie posters for CoS showing a green eyed Daniel Radcliff as HP. Wish I could site it for you, but I believe it was in the subway in NYC. I remember very clearly thinking he has blue eyes in the movie and they had deliberately changed the colour on the poster? Seems odd. Why would they bother? I also hope there is no plot clash too, but I can easily see Warner Bros., suddenly showing us green eyed Harry if they choose to, and it does become an important plot point in the future. Movie facts are so disposable and seem to be changed whenever the need is present. Mandy. From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Sun Nov 16 17:49:50 2003 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:49:50 -0000 Subject: Howgarts Clubs ( was Ignorance and the Toad) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85168 > > Is this the sort of thing where the WW relies on Muggles? Elderly > Wizards disguised as Muggles would surely pass unnoticed in > comparison with many dedicated opera buffs. > > - Caipora They sure can, or else how would Dumbledore have interest in chamber music, as written on his Famous Wizards Card. So I guess they can have opera too. Olivier From rredordead at aol.com Sun Nov 16 20:34:19 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 20:34:19 -0000 Subject: Percey Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85169 A few people have brought up the idea they expect the Imperius Curse to resurface in Books 6 & 7. I think it already has. Percy Weasley is acting under the Imperius all through OotP. He is not so drastically different that his family are completely surprised by his actions and yet he is operating and making decisions that are somewhat out of character for a beloved son of the Weasley household. After all, it is ok to disagree with your family, but to turn your back on your father publicly the way Percy does after Harry trial in OotP is a terribly slur and while Percy is a Humongous Bighead and supports the Minister unquestionably, he does also respect and love his parents. Also Percy's letter to Ron contains enough of Percy for his own brother to accept it is him but I have never known Percy to interfere with his younger brother in such a direct way before. The Percy Weasley in OotP so far beyond the Percy in earlier books. As for who put him under it, it has the undisputed master of the Imperius: Mr. Lucius Malfoy. We know, or are fairly confident, Cornelius Fudge himself is not under the curse, at least not yet. That would be too dangerous and foolish a move to make at this point in time, with Voldemort still weak. So what better alternative but to have his own personal assistant controlled? Percy would have access to the Ministers schedule, know his daily movements, who is in his office and when, even, possibly, what is being discussed in meetings. It's the perfect place for Lucius to be watching from. Not to mention his satisfaction in having one of Arthur's sons under his control. Lucius must be loving the misery he is causing within the Weasley household. What to you think? Mandy From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 22:27:10 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 22:27:10 -0000 Subject: Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85170 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: > > ...substantial edit... > > Your Wagner comment is heresy, but I'll let it slide for now. :) > After all, Nicolas Flamel was an opera buff; but I doubt most > wizards would think "Oh, something amazing Muggles do that we don't! > Let's go see it!" Far, far too much cultural chauvinism to admit > that. > > ...edited... > > -Nora bboy_mn: Nicholas Flamel - '...noted alchemist and opera lover...' (PS/SS) Albus Dumbledore - '...enjoys chamber music and tenpin bowling...' (PS/SS) [Side Note: is there anyone besides me who find the vision of Dumbledore in wizard robes and bowling shoes a little funny.] Barty Crouch Sr - '...My wife and sone will be arriving shortly, we are attending a concert tonight with Mr. and Mrs. Fude." (GoF) The Yule Ball - 'Rumors ...were flying everywhere, thought Harry didn't beleive half of them -- for instance, that Dumbledore had bout 800 barrels of mulled mead.... It seemed to be fact, however, that he had booked the Wierd Sisters...." (GoF) Wizards Wireless - 'Exactly who or what the Wierd Sisters were Harry didn't know, never having had access to a wizard's wireless, but he decuded from the wild exitement of those wo had gron up listening to the Wizards WIrelss Network that the were a very famous musical group.' (GoF) Stubby Boardman - '...lead singer of populat singing group, The Hobgoblins,....' (OoP) We can't prove that Music and other art forms are part of Hogwarts life, but the do seem to be a common part of wizard life, and I personally think it is safe to assume that there is a fair amount of artistic activity at Hogwarts in the form of school clubs. Up until the latest book (OoP), Hogwarts appeared to have near zero extra-cirricular activities, now we see that there are all kinds. Personally, I've always been a little put off by the fact the Ron wasn't part of the Chess Club. If there is a Gobstones club then certainly there must be a wizard's chess club. Certainly, a good rousing inter-house chess tournement would be fun. It might even provide some groundwork for life after Hogwarts for Ron. Just a thought. bboy_mn From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 22:48:44 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 22:48:44 -0000 Subject: Endings - OT Side Note - Comedy vs Tragedy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85171 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > Marianne wrote: > > I can see JKR stripping Harry of his magic powers, ... Harry will be > the hero who vanishes from the world he saved, .... > > Berit: > > I can't believe anybody can see such an ending coming :-) It would > be downright cruel of Rowling to throw Harry a fate like that. Death > would be much more merciful ... > > Berit bboy_mn: Don't really have much to add to the real topic at hand. But I would like to point out that the 'Happily Ever After' Romantic Comedy is pretty much an invention and mainstay of the USA. A substantial portion of the world, most notibly parts of Asia, and Central and South America prefer a good tragedy to a romantic comedy. I think, although I will need someone to confirm it, that even parts of Europe have a strong preference for dark drama and tragedy over comedy. Clarification; when I say 'comedy', I am generalizing, and referring to the USA preference for happy endings in all things. I don't know if the is a phenomenon in the UK, but I just wanted to remind USA readers that our view of the world (& life and art), is not the only view, nor is it necessarily the dominant view. Just a thought. bboy_mn From suzchiles at msn.com Sun Nov 16 22:57:42 2003 From: suzchiles at msn.com (Suzanne Chiles) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 14:57:42 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Endings References: <011a01c3ac64$cdb71260$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85172 I think that after Harry defeats Voldemort in the great final battle, the Ministry of Magic will offer him many accolades and any position in the MoM he might want. Harry will thank them politely, say no, and become a professional Quidditch player. Next to defeating Voldemort, I can't think of anything that would make Harry happier than that. Suzanne From rvotaw at i-55.com Sun Nov 16 23:06:26 2003 From: rvotaw at i-55.com (Richelle Votaw) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 17:06:26 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Imperius Curse (was Predictions-Plot devises in 6 & 7) References: <00bc01c3ac5f$6de8cdb0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: <005a01c3ac96$43af4e20$3da0cdd1@RVotaw> No: HPFGUIDX 85173 Joj wrote: > 2. Imperius curse- We've heard about this since the first book. It was > used slightly in OotP, but I feel it's the same as my example above. Why > have this be one of three unforgivable curses if it isn't going to be used > in a big way. My bet is Ron being made to do some pretty despicable things, > but it could be anyone. Maybe even Harry will be used in this way. That > way we would get a first person account of what it feels like to fall under > this curse. I know he threw it off with Fake Moody, but what if Voldemrt > cast it himself? Don't forget Harry did throw it off when Voldemort cast it. In the graveyard in GoF. When Voldemort tried to get Harry to say "No" that he didn't want Voldemort to Crucio him again. And Harry resisted, and yelled "I won't!" instead. Quite embarassing for Voldemort, that was. :) Anyway, that point aside, I do think that it's possible someone is under the Imperius curse even now. Tonks, perhaps. That's the only thing I could connect her clumbsiness to. She has tried to get close to Harry, little things that by themselves don't mean anything, but combined could add up to something bigger. And during the battle in the MoM, she got put away awfully quick, for an auror and all. I definitely think something is fishy there. Richelle From nanadetoronto at hotmail.com Sun Nov 16 18:08:14 2003 From: nanadetoronto at hotmail.com (catimini15) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:08:14 -0000 Subject: Ignorance and the toad In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85175 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Nora Renka" wrote: So pooh on the movies for adding in something that should be > conspicuous in its absence! The grand traditions of Muggle music are > something the WW seems to be missing, and our canon appreciator of > classical music (chamber music, from his Chocolate Frog Card) > Dumbledore, is considerately more appreciative of Muggle culture than > most. I like that as a theme, and I'd love to see if it bears out in > the future. > > -Nora feels a kinship with Nicolas Flamel, noted opera-lover. Now me (Nadine): I was surprised as well to see the choir (and the giant toad - is this a clue about the inmportance of Trevor?) in the PoA's trailer but then I remembered that in PS/SS, Dumbledore leads up the students into a song that ?everybody finished (...) at different times. At last, only the Weasley twins were left singing along to a very slow funeral march?. I hope this helps. Nadine ;-) PS : I apologize for my bad written english. It is not my mother tongue. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 18:12:11 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:12:11 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory In-Reply-To: <1a1.1cf3b1b5.2ce733ba@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85176 Tonks wrote: > I do not deny the possibility of a distant relative. But still, if Petunia is > Harry's 'ONLY' relative... doesn't this make for something interesting? > -Tonks I think Petunia is Harry's only *known* relative. Dumbledore isn't lying or exaggerating: he's speaking the truth as he knows it. Also there's the question of definition. Not to sound like former President Clinton defining "is," but it depends on how you define "family" and "relative." They're relative terms. (Forgive the pun. I'm serious here.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 18:50:41 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:50:41 -0000 Subject: More Questions. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85177 Tonks wrote: > > ... Hagrid ... tells Harry that his mum and dad were Head Boy and Head > > Girl. I know we only have one instance (of headboy) in canon- Percy, > > that we can directly derive any fact. So, if DD made Lupin prefect for > > his year, why would he derail from this decision ...and appoint James > > as Head Boy? > bboy_mn responded: > > Pure speculation, we need our Brit school experts to weigh in on this > one, but I concluded that Head Boy was based on different objectives > than Prefect. > > Headship is based on general excellences and achievement, whereas > Prefectship is based on trustworthiness, maturity, and ability to > command respect and obedience from the other students as well as > general academic excellences. > > Sirius and James were the best student to ever come through the > school; positively brilliant academically. So they would seem likely > candidates for Headship, but they were not much on 'law and order', > either adhering to it or enforcing it, so their chances of Prefectship > would have been slim. > > In a sense, Headship is like valedictorian, whereas Prefectship is > like a hall monitor and related to the functional and orderly running > of the school. I partially agree with bboy-mn, but I was under the impression that Head Boy and Head Girl were the best students in the school, automatically awarded the position on the basis of their performance on their examinations rather than being appointed. Bill and Percy both received twelve O.W.L.S. and both became Head Boy, but the appointment had no direct connection to their previous appointment as Prefects. How do we know? Because James became Head Boy without having ever been a Prefect and Remus remained a Prefect without becoming Head Boy--as did the three other male Prefects from his year. We don't have any evidence for Head Boy and Head Girl being nominated or appointed. If they are, the criteria can't be the same as for Prefects. If they were, then the seventh-year Prefects with the best grades would always become Head Boy and Girl. No doubt that happens fairly frequently, as in the cases of Percy and Bill, but the case of James and Remus shows that academic performance, not the ability to set an example and monitor other students, is what determines the Head Boyship. It makes sense to me that this position would be automatically determined. That way the houses won't be in competition with one another and no head of house will feel slighted if his or her best student is not chosen. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 19:18:10 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 19:18:10 -0000 Subject: Of snakes and dragons (was Harry's green eyes) In-Reply-To: <20031115075548.19108.qmail@web20207.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85178 > Iggy said: > Well, old lore tells of dragons of great age that were able to change their > shape, much like an animagus. Perhaps Harry's ancestry includes a Welsh > Green that married / mated into the family many years ago, so Lily's > bloodline to him carries a modicum of dragon blood. > laurlexis asked: > Is there any relationship between snakes and dragons? They may both be reptiles - or reptilian, not sure exactly where one would class a dragon - but other than that I don't see a link between Harry's being a parselmouth and possible dragon lineage. The theory intrigues me, however. While I don't want to speculate on a possible dragon ancestor for Harry, which seems to me to be getting a little far afield, I want to mention that, yes, there's a connection between snakes and dragons. Tolkien, who was influenced by Norse and Icelandic mythology, refers somewhere to a dragon called Scatha the Worm, with "Worm" meaning Snake. (Presumably Scatha slithers rather than flies, a wingless, snakelike dragon.) Also Wormtongue (Saruman's spy, Grima in LOTR) means Snaketongue, as in the old saying, "He speaks with a forked tongue," a trait that also applies to Tolkien's dragons. The name Wormtail strikes me as being a little too similar to Wormtongue, but I don't think James and company had snakes in mind when they gave Peter that nickname. More likely it refers to the wormlike appearance of his tail when he's transformed into a rat. On the other hand, he is certainly untrustworthy, so maybe there's an element of worm = snake in that name, too--unwitting prophecy on the part of James and company and deliberate foreshadowing on JKR's part. Someone familiar with Norse or Icelandic mythology might be able to follow up on the snake/dragon/worm connection. Anybody? Carol From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 16 21:24:42 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 21:24:42 -0000 Subject: Predictions-Plot devises in 6 & 7 In-Reply-To: <00bc01c3ac5f$6de8cdb0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85179 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" wrote: Joj: > There are some things we have seen mentioned or used in small ways, that I > think will be big plot devises used in the next two books. > 2. Imperius curse- We've heard about this since the first book. It was > used slightly in OotP, but I feel it's the same as my example above. Why > have this be one of three unforgivable curses if it isn't going to be used > in a big way. My bet is Ron being made to do some pretty despicable things, > but it could be anyone. Maybe even Harry will be used in this way. That > way we would get a first person account of what it feels like to fall under > this curse. I know he threw it off with Fake Moody, but what if Voldemrt > cast it himself? > Geoff: It was used in GOF - Real!Moody was kept under the Curse while Fake! Moody was whizzing around the place and Barty Crouch Snr kept Barty Crouch Jnr under it until Voldemort arrived and put him (BCs) under it. I think that represents a fairly substantial use of the curse..... Begins to sound a bit like musical chairs. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 16 19:43:24 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 19:43:24 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85180 Abigail wrote: Whether or not Headship is an academic distinction, I find > it hard to believe that it would be bestowed on a trouble-maker - if that were > the case, why didn't Fred or George become Head Boy? They're both > prodigiously talented wizards, as we can see from their ingenious methods > of resistance at the end of OOP. They're prodigiously talented but not academically inclined. Note that they drop out before they take their N.E.W.T.S. and receive only three O.W.L.S. apiece as compared with Percy's three, so they're not candidates for Head Boy even if it's an appointed position and not automatic, as I suspect it to be. And even if they were inclined in a direction other than mischief, I think they'd have been passed over as Prefects because either one twin would be chosen over the other (imagine the jealousy of the twin who wasn't chosen and the breach in their till then nearly frictionless relationship) or there'd be a duplication of office. (Does this mean that Lee Jordan was the prefect for their year? Can't be. We never see him in that capacity. There must be some other Gryffindor boy of their age who's not mentioned.) Carol From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 17 01:20:55 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 01:20:55 -0000 Subject: Endings - OT Side Note - Comedy vs Tragedy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85181 bboy_mn wrote: > Don't really have much to add to the real topic at hand. But I would > like to point out that the 'Happily Ever After' Romantic Comedy is > pretty much an invention and mainstay of the USA. > > A substantial portion of the world, most notibly parts of Asia, and > Central and South America prefer a good tragedy to a romantic comedy. > I think, although I will need someone to confirm it, that even parts > of Europe have a strong preference for dark drama and tragedy over comedy. Me: Bboy_mn; are you implying I am an American? Not all "foreigners" prefer dark endings and tragedy, as a European I love happy endings. But my cultural taste is probably under heavy American influence then :-) Still, I can't for my life see why the Harry Potter story has to end in dull, boring "tragedy". Because it would be incredibly disappointing if Harry, at the end of book 7, woke up in his bed in Privet Drive, realizing he had only dreamt the whole story, or; as it has been suggested; Harry is denied the magical world and all his best friends to go back to live in the muggle world. Better let Harry die a hero's death which would be a much more fitting end to the tale. I'm not saying I WANT him to die, but I sure don't want him back to the dull, grey muggle world... Berit http://home.no.net/berjakob/snape.html From witchywoman at obdb.net Sun Nov 16 23:14:29 2003 From: witchywoman at obdb.net (Tammy) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:14:29 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Endings References: <011a01c3ac64$cdb71260$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: <000a01c3ac97$632145f0$99960144@home> No: HPFGUIDX 85182 I'm new and saying hello and putting my thoughts in the pensieve for safe and further review later. haha... First off, my name is Tammy (aka Witchy Woman). I read all 5 Harry Potter books in the span of 12 days. I probably should have spread it out some now that I look back on it. The wait for the next book and/or movie is going to KILL me. Until I found this list, I thought I was in a very small minority of adults that loved these books. Boy was I wrong! ENDING: What I would LIKE to see.....not what I am convinced will happen is that Harry lives through it all, goes back to Hogwarts to become their permanent Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher (whats the acronym? DADA?). He's already proven that he is quite good at teaching others to defend themselves. So if he lives, I'd like to see it end like this. Tammy (Witchy Woman) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 00:58:33 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 00:58:33 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85183 > nymphadoraotonks wrote: > > > In the Chapter 'The Boy Who Lived', when Dumbledore and McGonagall > are discussing whether or not it is wise to leave Harry with the > Dursleys, DD says that they are the only family he has. In canon, > wouldn't this negate any possibility of there being more Evanses or > Potters out there? > > Ghingapuss responded: > Yes that is very true. But do you believe Dumbledore? I don't, not > anymore. Certainly, DD is not lying to hurt Harry but I believe he > is deceiving him to protect him, stretching the truth. After all DD > has a lot riding on Harry Potter and has to protect him until the boy > is old and ready enough to fulfill his destiny, whatever that my > be. > > Now as far as Mark Evans being a relative? I don't buy it. Evans if > the most common of welsh names. So is Mark. But it does seem like a > big coincidence especially in a book whose author who puts so much > research into the names of her characters. We know JKR picked that > name for a reason, but I believe that reason is a big fat red herring. Carol: As I said in another post (but the comment may have been lost or overlooked so forgive me for repeating it here), a red herring must have a purpose: to provide a false clue to the solution of some mystery. What purpose would be served here by the introduction of a red herring? The reflections in the mirror of Erised suggest that we'll discover the fates not only of his parents (we still don't know exactly what happened to them) but of other family members as well. Mark Evans could be the key to the Evans side of the family. It seems significant that Harry knows his name and age--odd considering the five-year difference in their ages and Harry's limited opportunities for leaving the house in his younger years. How did he come to know a ten-year-old boy? I still say, why name Mark at all if he isn't going to serve a purpose? Remember Mrs. Figg and Sirius Black, both sneaked into the narrative in SS/PS. I sensed something "witchy" about Mrs. Figg (the cats and eccentricity), but I never guessed that "young Sirius Black," owner of the magic motorcycle, would be the Prisoner of Azkaban. I've learned to be wary of such hints. I can't think of any (aside from misleading us with regard to the side a particular person is on) that have turned out to be red herrings. Carol Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 01:28:26 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 01:28:26 -0000 Subject: Slytherin MWPP In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85184 > "Kathryn Cawte" wrote: > > You know one of the arguments for James and/or Sirius not being > Slytherins > > is that they were probably all the same house, but what if they > were *all* > > Slytherins? > > Marianne said: > I'm leaning more and more to MWPP all being in Slytherin. There is > certainly support for James being a Gryff, but JKR has not explicitly > said so. > Okay, here's my first prediction for future books. We'll find out > that Snape and MWPP were all Slyths in the same year. Snape was odd > man out because he more firmly believed in the whole pure-blood > superiority thing. Thus he was alienated from his dormmates, J,S,R, > and P. However, he was taken in by some of the other, older Slyths > including Lucius and the Black cousins, who, in turn despised Sirius, > for not buying into the blood purity ideal. > This can also tie in with the victimized Snape we see in OoP. By the > time they're in their fifth year, Snape's older allies like Lucius > and Bellatrix have left Hogwarts. He is now more vulnerable to a > joint attack by Sirius and James. Of course, this warped, little > theory doesn't take into account that if the 5 were all in the same > year, Snape risked being hexed into oblivion every time he went to > sleep at night. Carol The victimized Snape idea would still work if he were a Slytherin and James et al were Gryffindors. I agree that the older Slytherins young Snape had hung around with had probably graduated several years before the events we witness in the Pensieve. Lucius Malfoy certainly had, and IIRC, the Lestranges are closer to his age than Snape's. It isn't necessary for the Marauders (sorry, Steve) to be Slytherins to account for this state of affairs. Also, the adult Sirius seems to me to hold Slytherin in contempt. A person who was in Slytherin himself would not refer to "a gang of Slytherins." Also, Lupin, at least, has no traits that would have placed him in Slytherin. Where are his cunning and ambition? For that matter, I don't see much ambition in the fifteen-ear-old James or Sirius. Sirius seems to expect to be treated like royalty for his good looks. James is a show off who likes being admired for his quidditch skills. But they don't seem to be working hard to earn high marks and carve a place for themselves in the WW. They just want to have fun--at Snape's expense or by risking expulsion with their "marauding" adventures. There's no question that they love mischief, but mischief is not a Slytherin trait. (Look at the Weasley twins. They break a lot of rules, but they just want to have fun.) And, whatever we may think of the Marauders' exploits, it took courage to transform themselves into animals so they could wander around with a werewolf. If they were ambitious, they would have spent their time working to promote their future careers (think of the hours Snape must have spent cramming for that Potions exam). Instead they devoted their spare time to learning how to become illegal animagi. Where is the ambition in that? Carol, who has read too many interviews in which JKR makes it clear that Gryffindor is her favorite house to believe that she would have put Harry's father and godfather in any other house. I don't think Lily would have married James if he were a Slytherin, either. Carol From BeckyCartwright1405 at hotmail.com Sun Nov 16 14:10:50 2003 From: BeckyCartwright1405 at hotmail.com (blueangelcvhp) Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 14:10:50 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85185 hickengruendler > I don't think that really matters. If I were Voldeort, I would > have > tried to kill Harry and Neville. Therefore the Potters and the > Longbottoms were both on his "to die" list. But maybe Frank and > ALice > longbottom had a trustworthy secret keeper, therefore he had the > chance to go to the Potters first. Jen R: As Dumbledore said, "he {Voldie) chose the boy he thought > most likely to be a danger to him...he chose, not the pureblood, but > the half-blood like himself." (OOTP, US, chap. 37, p. 842), so the > Prophecy alone could lead to the 'animus' described in the interview- > --Voldie decided Harry was the "One with the Power" and the Potters > were his barrier to killing the boy. I tend to think it also has to > do with the Potters in general (as Nora mentioned), their defiance > as pure-bloods who oppose Voldie. Perhaps even having a child at > all, a Potter heir, was considered 'definace' by Voldie. > > This is tangential, but I've been curious about the Longbottom > secret keeper. Did they give up their secret keeper once Voldie was > presumed dead, and that's how Bella and Company found them? Or did > they have an unreliable secret keeper...perhaps even Caradoc > Dearborn who gave up their secret and then disappeared?!? (Sorry-- I > just have Dearborn on the brain today, wondering about his purpose). I've never really understood why getting the prophecy was so important to Voldemort. From the beginning he's been trying to kill Harry so why was it so important to get the prophecy?It didn't really tell us anything new or anything that would help Voldemort defeat/kill Harry. It just seems that he spent the whole book trying to get the thing for no real reason. It was a brilliant book and I was thrilled with it the whole way through but I found the prophecy a bit of a let down. Especially without knowing how or why the Potter defied Voldemort or why he chose Harry not Nevile. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 01:53:20 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 01:53:20 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85186 > Tonks: > > > Some recent posting made me stop and think for a while this > evening > > > as to what the reaction *would* be if Harry meets his end in book > > > seven... or six for that matter. ... what kind of awful mess has > > > Pottermania created if Harry were to die? > > > Geoff: > > (1) I would throw the book across the room! > > (2) This raises an interesting point. If the story is seen from > Harry's POV, does the book come to a full stop at that point? I > suppose we would go into epilogue mode or something similar. Carol: Your POV observation makes sense to me. Thanks! Also, think of the thousnads (millions?) of young readers who idolize Rowling now but would feel betrayed if she killed Harry. Yes, she writes primarily for herself, but I can't see her doing that to them. (Besides, she'd have to go into hiding to avoid having tomatoes thrown at her--or worse.) Hardly anyone would buy the books once the word got out, so I don't think her publisher would allow her to do it. And she cried when she killed off Sirius, who barely qualifies as a major character, and she's made it fairly clear that she won't kill off Hagrid or Ron, so she probably feels even more strongly about killing Harry. "There will be more deaths," she said in an interview (I can hunt up the reference if anyone wants it), but readers will have a hard enough time if she bumps off Neville or Ginny. I just can't see her killing off Harry himself. (As for killing him in Book 6--that's not going to happen. How's she going to write a whole subsequent book with a dead protagonist?) I personally would consider killing Harry a copout, on the same level as "it was all a dream." Only an author who can't think of a way to weave all the loose ends into the fabric of the story kills off the protagonist and considers it a denouement. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 02:57:02 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 02:57:02 -0000 Subject: Goyle sen. in Azkaban? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85187 > > If Goyle wasn't involved in the Ministry raid, they can't pin > anything > > on him yet. > Hickengruendler: > But he was at Voldemort's rebirth at the graveyard. Harry saw him > there and he mentioned Goyle's name in the interview. Now, that > everybody knows Harry was telling the truth, wouldn't it be logical > to arrest Goyle as well? Harry is a witness, that should be enough to > get Goyle. > I don't think he can be arrested for appearing at a secret meeting at which he did nothing more than stand aside to watch Voldemort duel Harry. The DEs didn't plan the Ministry raid in Harry's hearing so he can't be arrested on conspiracy charges. He would have to be arrested on specific charges (using an illegal spell, for example). He's not one of the escapees from Azkaban. He apparently escaped prison, as Lucius Malfoy and several others did, by pretending to have been under an Imperius curse. Until he commits an actual crime, the Ministry has no grounds to arrest him. No doubt he'll be closely watched now that he's been identified as a Death Eater (if Fudge remembers that Harry named him as attending the meeting), but as far as I know, just being a Death Eater is not in itself a crime. Malfoy and the others walked around as free as ever until they were arrested for participating in the DoM raid. Carol From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Mon Nov 17 03:33:49 2003 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 03:33:49 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85188 > > Tonks: Some recent posting made me stop and think for a while > > this evening as to what the reaction *would* be if Harry meets > > > > his end in book seven... or six for that matter. ... what > > > > kind of awful mess has Pottermania created if Harry dies? > > Geoff: > > (1) I would throw the book across the room! > > (2) This raises an interesting point. If the story is seen from > > Harry's POV, does the book come to a full stop at that point? I > > suppose we would go into epilogue mode or something similar. > > Carol: (snipped) > Your POV observation makes sense to me... young readers who idolize > Rowling now but would feel betrayed if she killed Harry. Yes, she > writes primarily forherself, but I can't see her doing that > ... she cried when she killed off Sirius, who barely qualifies > as a major character,...she probably feels even more strongly about > killing Harry. Harry and the twins were grounded from Quidditch in OotP to let other characters blossom ... so if Harry bites the bullet in #6, #7 will be "Neville Longbottom and the Nerds Revenge" - I think that is too much of a gamble for JKR .... lol From erinellii at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 04:07:01 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 04:07:01 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85189 > Carol: Also, think of the thousands (millions?) of young readers who idolize Rowling now but would feel betrayed if she killed Harry. Erin: Millions. Definitely millions (and millions and millions and millions... ) I think they are up to like 12 million copies in the US alone. And when you figure in that my copy has been loaned to 4 people besides myself since June... Carol: Hardly anyone would buy the books once the word got out, so I don't think her publisher would allow her to do it. And she cried when she killed off Sirius, who barely qualifies as a major character, and she's made it fairly clear that she won't kill off Hagrid or Ron, so she probably feels even more strongly about killing Harry. Erin: There are so many things wrong with these statements I hardly even know where to start :-) First off, I highly doubt that at this point her publisher has any control over how the books will turn out. As you noted earlier, in a part I snipped, she writes these books for herself. Period. If Bloomsbury or Scholastic didn't like a certain plotline, she could sell it to a different publisher in a hot second. Any of them would leap to take it. And "hardly anyone would buy the books once the word got out" of Harry dying? Can you truly believe that? I mean, a tragic ending never stopped Romeo and Juliet from being popular. And there's a certain new movie out that's selling pretty well despite the hero's death at the end. Star Wars is still going strong although we all realize the main guy is about to become Darth Vader. I think Harry Potter would sell even if she had all the characters bite it and Voldemort win at last. If you don't, perhaps you don't realize just how big this thing really is. Next- Sirius not a major character?? The guy had a whole *book* named after him. Harry regarded him as a mixture of father and brother. Probably only Ron or Hermione's death could have hurt him more. How much more major do you want? And lastly- I'll give you Ron. I've seen the interview(s?) where JKR says how cliqued it is to kill the best friend. But where are you getting that she's not going to kill Hagrid? Myself, I think Hagrid is dead, dead, dead by the end of the series. Carol: (As for killing him in Book 6--that's not going to happen. > How's she going to write a whole subsequent book with a dead > protagonist?) Erin: Ok, this is the one point upon which I agree with you totally. Just plain silly for anyone to think she could kill Harry in book six. Carol: Only an author who can't think of a way to weave all the loose ends into the fabric of the story kills off the protagonist and considers it a denouement. Erin: Actually, having the hero die is a classic... oh, I can't really explain it properly, but you should definitely read Joseph Campbell's "The Hero With A Thousand Faces" to get a better understanding of why so many heros end up biting it. It has to do with the whole heroic journey thing. I will limit myself to asking if you consider Shakespeare to be a substandard author, since several of his plays end as tragedies? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 03:42:55 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 03:42:55 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85190 hickengruendler wrote: If I were Voldeort, I would > have > > tried to kill Harry and Neville. Therefore the Potters and the > > Longbottoms were both on his "to die" list. But maybe Frank and > ALice > > longbottom had a trustworthy secret keeper, therefore he had the > > chance to go to the Potters first. > > Jen R wrote: As Dumbledore said, "he {Voldie) chose the boy he thought > most likely to be a danger to him...he chose, not the pureblood, but > the half-blood like himself." (OOTP, US, chap. 37, p. 842), so the > Prophecy alone could lead to the 'animus' described in the interview- > --Voldie decided Harry was the "One with the Power" and the Potters > were his barrier to killing the boy. I tend to think it also has to > do with the Potters in general (as Nora mentioned), their defiance > as pure-bloods who oppose Voldie. Perhaps even having a child at > all, a Potter heir, was considered 'definace' by Voldie. >pose). The "defiance as pure-bloods" might explain why LV killed James (aside from the inconvenient fact that James was a powerful wizard who was preventing him from reaching his real target), but it wouldn't apply to Lily, who (as the quoted passage reminds us) is a muggle-born. Voldemort dismisses her as a "silly girl" and tells her to "stand aside" (as if any mother would do that in those circumstances). He seems, in fact, to hold her in contempt as an unworthy adversary despite those mysterious instances of "defiance." I suppose James's marriage to a muggle-born *might* qualify as an act of defiance because the pure Potter blood would be "contaminated" by the (predominantly) muggle blood of the Evanses, but I rather doubt it. The Longbottoms, OTOH, *were* pure bloods, but their marriage was along the lines he approved of. I can't see him considering it, or their having a pure blood child, as one of their acts of defiance. Maybe the Longbottoms and James were "blood traitors," but Lily was just "your muggle mother" (to use Young Tom Riddle's words to Harry in CS. She was killed because she stood in Voldemort's way, not because she had previously defied him. Carol From erinellii at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 04:20:21 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 04:20:21 -0000 Subject: Goyle sen. in Azkaban? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85191 > > Hickengruendler: Now, that everybody knows Harry was telling the truth, wouldn't it be logical to arrest Goyle as well? Harry is a witness, that should be enough to get Goyle. > > > >Carol: > I don't think he can be arrested for appearing at a secret meeting at which he did nothing more than stand aside to watch Voldemort duel Harry. Erin: You don't? But even under US law, that would be accomplice to attempted murder. And I think that WW laws are very far from muggle ones... Carol: ... but as far as I know, just being > a Death Eater is not in itself a crime. Malfoy and the others walked > around as free as ever until they were arrested for participating in > the DoM raid. Erin: That was because the Ministry didn't believe that they *were* Death Eaters at that point, not because being a Death Eater is okay. Fudge was in denial about Voldemort's return. Now that he has acknowleged it, I'm willing to bet it's war on all suspected DE's. I'm thinking Book 6 opens with Goyle Sr. in hiding along with Voldy and Wormtail and Belatrix. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 04:29:33 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 04:29:33 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Leadership (was: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85192 - > Pippin wrote: > But where, tell me, does Lupin take an interest in making > friends with his enemies? Snape and Pettigrew are Lupin's > enemies. I don't see him reaching out to them. > > > Laura: > > Remus seems pretty conciliatory to Snape in both PoA and OoP. As > for Wormtail, he's *everyone's* enemy. He's long past the point > where a heart-to-heart would make a difference. Carol: I agree with Laura. If Lupin still dislikes Snape, he generally keeps it to himself. He certainly doesn't reciprocate Snape's intense loathing of him, which is less noticeable in OotP than PoA. (The boggart scene may indicate a slight lingering dislike, but I don't think Lupin planned it in advance; once Neville had identified Snape as his greatest fear, Lupin was more or less committed to making him look ridiculous. His motive seems to have been to help Neville rather than to spite Snape.) Lupin calls Snape Severus and addresses him in an open, friendly manner, whereas Snape calls him Lupin and is coldly civil. Lupin has clearly come to trust Snape, as he demonstrates to Harry by drinking the smoking, foul-tasting wolfbane potion in front of him and praising Snape's skill as a potion maker. He knows (better than Snape does, at least in PoA) that they're on the same side. Now that Lupin is no longer teaching, Snape has no need to fear for the safety of the students with a werewolf on the staff (or to be jealous of Lupin for holding the DADA position). Snape also suspected Lupin of helping Sirius enter Hogwarts to murder Harry, but that misunderstanding is now cleared up as well. I don't think Lupin ever hated Snape in any case, though he may have disliked him when they were boys and he would certainly have known in PoA that Snape still hated him. Still, with Sirius out of the way, it's possible that they can come to a better understanding. In fact, if the Order is to accomplish anything useful in the battle against Voldemort, I think that will have to happen. Carol, who likes them both for very different reasons From AllieS426 at aol.com Mon Nov 17 04:47:31 2003 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 04:47:31 -0000 Subject: Where is the other Lestrange? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85193 We saw Bellatrix in OoP over and over, and we know all about her heavy-lidded eyes... but wasn't there a husband? At the end of GoF, Voldemort says that they're in Azkaban ("the Lestranges"), and we never hear that one of them has died. So where is he? And is he also completely insane? :) Allie From erinellii at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 04:58:50 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 04:58:50 -0000 Subject: Where is the other Lestrange? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85194 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" wrote: > We saw Bellatrix in OoP over and over, and we know all about her > heavy-lidded eyes... but wasn't there a husband? At the end of GoF, Voldemort says that they're in Azkaban ("the Lestranges"), and we never hear that one of them has died. So where is he? And is he > also completely insane? :) > > Allie Erin: That would be Rodolphus Lestrange. Harry notices him on the tapestry at Sirius's house. He broke out of Azkaban with the others. He was present at the MoM battle and was arrested as a DE again. If he is as crazy as Bellatrix, he's a lot quieter about it. Erin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 05:00:48 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 05:00:48 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes (was Ask the Question) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85195 > > Carolyn wrote: > > Thanks Geoff, I missed that one ! So, just we're left with the > puzzle > > over Harry's green eyes. Jen Reese has again pointed out the canon > > for them apparently being important, so maybe its just something > JKR > > could not influence in the movie. > > Geoff: > But as someone pointed out, although Harry is green eyed in the book, > Dainel Radcliffe didn't wear contact lenses. Possibly he is allergic > to them. Some people can't wear them. Let's hope it doesn't cause a > clash between a future movie and the books. Carol: I read somewhere (here?) that he *can't* wear contacts. I assume that the obstacle will be overcome by writing the movie script to indicate that Harry inherited his father's build, hair, and glasses but his mother's eyes. The eyes don't necessarily have to be green for the motif to work. They just have to noticeably resemble Lily's. Carol From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 17 05:30:43 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 05:30:43 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Leadership (was: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85196 > Carol: > I agree with Laura. If Lupin still dislikes Snape, he generally keeps it to himself. He certainly doesn't reciprocate Snape's intense loathing of him, which is less noticeable in OotP than PoA. (The boggart scene may indicate a slight lingering dislike, but I don't think Lupin planned it in advance; once Neville had identified Snape as his greatest fear, Lupin was more or less committed to making him look ridiculous. His motive seems to have been to help Neville rather than to spite Snape.)< But it didn't help Neville, actually. "Snape didn't seem to find it funny. His eyes flashed menacingly at the very mention of Lupin's name and he was bullying Neville worse than ever." -PoA ch.8 Since Neville has to deal with Snape far more often than he has to deal with boggarts, it's a net loss, IMO. Pippin From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 17 06:14:42 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 06:14:42 -0000 Subject: The Case for Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85197 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "olivierfouquet2000" wrote: > I must say it is with some fear that I attack one of the most formidable (and twisted) theory of HPFGU : ESE!Lupin. Fear? I don't bite, honest. > > But there it is, today I join the PARTY LINE. > > Let us start with the infamous post 39362. Let us look at the string of arguments used :<< I'm impressed. I hope you don't mind if I answer only where I have something to add to what I've said in the past. (speaking of the scene in PoA where Lupin is reluctant to touch Harry) Oliver said: > 5) has been somewhat weakened by the following books in my opinion. After all, Crouch!Moody does take Harry in his arms, Macnair almost strangled Harry in the Department of Mystery and Lupin himself held Harry just after Sirius's death. Of course, it can be argued that Lupin's movement was rather a clue to his true nature, rather than a rational act, we will come back to this.<< Pippin: Lupin touches Harry for the first time when Harry is unconscious. "Lupin was tapping Harry hard on the face" PoA ch. 12. If he was afraid of a violent reaction that would be the safe way to go about it. No wizard, not even Dumbledore apparently, knows exactly how the ancient magic, "magic at its deepest, its most impenetrable" really works. It behooves ESE!Lupin to be cautious, since he is the first DE to touch Harry since Quirrell suffered immolation. But since Lupin was able to touch Harry, the other DE's could then do so, either because the magic doesn't work unless Voldemort is actually possessing them, or because Voldemort used Harry's blood to re-embody himself. Oliver: > 3) This one is a tough one. Lupin is scary. No doubt. Only I think JKR wrote him so in PoA for a specific reason, and not because he's ESE. t it is also my conviction that JKR did this to make the final confrontation in the Shack a climax. But the thing is I cannot really sense this tension in GoF (where Lupin is absent anyway, apart from Dumbledore asking Sirius to go to his place) nor in OoP. OoP's Lupin seemed to me gentle and mature, not scary at all. So I would say that Creepy!Lupin was a most effective plot device for PoA, and not an indication that he is ESE. > Pippin: Ah, but if JKR means to lull us into complacency and then shock us, as she has so many times in the past, she would need to dispel the aura of menace she created around Lupin in PoA, wouldn't she? Oliver: > > 2) is very disturbing. Yet, nothing proves it. First, canon is that Lupin overemphasises the importance of Occlumency ("There is nothing so important as you learning Occlumency" Lupin said sternly), then Harry says he'll try do talk to Snape (and of course he doesn't). In fact, seeing that Snape is perfectly aware of the iportance of Occlumency, the fact he ignored him would rather be a huge hint to an ESE!Snape rather than an ESE!Lupin. << Pippin: But as it turned out. what was keeping Voldemort out of Harry's mind was the very emotion Occlumency is supposed to suppress. Now, if ESE!Lupin realized this, then he would have every reason to encourage Harry to study Occlumency, and to try to press Snape to continue the lessons. Oliver: >> Last but not least, there is something I don't understand in JKR psychology if Lupin turns out to be ESE. In the live interview on Scholastic.com (02/03/00), she was asked to choose a teacher to teach her children. She picked Lupin "because he is kind, clever, and gives very interesting lessons." Now she could have chose McGonagall, who is certainly a most qualified teacher, Flitwick, who seems very nice too, or Dumbledore for that matter. That Lupin is one of JKR's favourite character (same interview) is not contradictory to him being ESE, but what kind of sadist would she be to wish her children to be taught by an evil man ?<< This is a tough one. But JKR has never said that Lupin is good. She has said that he has a dark side. She also said she put herself into a form of denial when she was writing about Sirius, because she knew all along he was going to die. She could probably do the same with ESE!Lupin. She emphasizes in OOP that you can be a good teacher and still have Voldemort growing out of the back of your head. She also said (through Dumbledore) that the undoubtably evil Kreacher is what he is because of what wizards have done to him. The real world Lupin would not be subject to discrimination by wizards, and would have become the good person he might have been. JKR's children are unlikely to be upset by the remark, IMO. A child young enough to believe that Lupin is a real person is also too young to understand that good and evil can co-exist in one individual. That is why there are no bad mothers in fairy tales; they are always stepmothers or aunts or something. The child would naturally assume that it is good Lupin who would teach the class. Bad Lupin would be another person entirely. Pippin author of the infamous post, who will readily grant Oliver his PARTY LINE badge. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 05:45:04 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 05:45:04 -0000 Subject: Arabella Figg In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85198 Troels wrote: > << the Order of the Phoenix. Of the members we know or strongly > suspect the house of, at least 6 were in Gryffindor (or are strongly > suspected thereof), only one was never at Hogwarts, and only one was > in Slytherin. >> > Rita Prince Winston responded: > Gryffindors: Dumbledore, Sirius, Remus, Peter, James, Lily, Arthur, > Molly, Bill, Charlie. Slytherin: Snape. Never at Hogwarts: are you > assuming that Arabella must not have gone to Hogwarts, just because > she's a Squib? I find that a reasonable assumption, but not canon. Carol: We do have canonical evidence that the MoM was unaware of Mrs. Figg's existence (Harry's trial in OoP). If she had attended Hogwarts, they would certainly have heard of her. More important, her name would not have been written in the Hogwarts book by the magical golden quill that records the birth of magical children because she wasn't one, so she would not have been sent a letter inviting her to attend. If she had somehow managed to attend without being invited, she would have been unable, as a nonmagical person, to pass many of her courses, notably Charms, Transfiguration, and Flying (the broom would not have responded to her "Up" command, much less to her wish to fly if she had one). (The only squib currently at Hogwarts is Filch, who would probably have had to reapeat his first year indefinitely until he gave it up.) Carol, who hopes that Mrs. Figg will prove everyone wrong and perform some magic in her old age From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 06:23:37 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 06:23:37 -0000 Subject: Phineas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85199 Berit wrote: > My thoughts about his name is that it is very much linked to his > Slytherin house (and heritage?). In many ways Phineas is portrayed as > the "ultimate" Slytherin: His name is very much so, a direct > reference to his house, and his clothes are painted in the Slytherin > colours of silver and green; his demeanour and mindset are very much > Slytherin: "We Slytherin's are brave, yes, but not stupid. For > instance, given the choice, we will always choose to save our own > necks first." (OoP p. 437) If Phineas is right, we really ought to give up all attempts to place Sirius in Slytherin. Not that he's stupid, far from it, but he's brave to the point of recklessness and he dies trying to save Harry's neck, not his own. (I think Sirius's definition of "stupid" would clash with his great-great-grandfather's.) Carol From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 07:44:04 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 07:44:04 -0000 Subject: Endings - OT Side Note - Comedy vs Tragedy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85200 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > bboy_mn wrote: > > > ... But I would like to point out that the 'Happily Ever After' > > Romantic Comedy is pretty much an invention and mainstay of the > > USA. > > > > A substantial portion of the world, most notibly parts of Asia, and > > Central and South America prefer a good tragedy to a romantic > comedy. > > I think, although I will need someone to confirm it, that even parts > > of Europe have a strong preference for dark drama and tragedy over > comedy. > > Me (Berit): > > Bboy_mn; are you implying I am an American? bboy_mn: I'm not making a comment ABOUT you, I am making a comment TO you, and that comment is, that a significant portion of the world really does love a good tragedy. > Berit: > > Not all "foreigners" prefer dark endings and tragedy, as a European > I love happy endings. bboy_mn: Point taken, but I never said 'all' or 'a mojority', only that substantial amount of people of shared culture, do like tragedies. With reference to Europe, I even left an element of doubt, as to how wide spread it was, and apealed to more knowledgable people to clarify. > Berit continue: > > But my cultural taste is probably under heavy American influence > then :-) bboy_mn: Yes, I can see the dominance of USA created movies having a worldwide influence, which is economically good, but not necessarily artistically good. It tend to homogenize entertainment. > Berit continues: > > ... incredibly disappointing if Harry, at the end..., woke up ..., > realizing he had only dreamt..., or; ...; Harry is denied the > magical world and all his best friends.... Better let Harry die a > hero's death .... I'm not saying I WANT him to die, but I sure don't > want him back to the dull, grey muggle world... > > Berit bboy_mn: I agree with what you said. I don't want to see Harry die, or be doomed to a mundane life as a muggle after experiencing the magic of the wizard world, even with all it's faults. However, the point I am making, is that the 'Happily Ever After' theme is very much a cultural thing, and give JKR's worldliness, it's possible her cultural sensibilities, do not conform to the notion that the hero always wins, and the story ends with him riding off into the sunset with the 'girl'. I hate the 'all a dream' idea, it seems like a cheating way out, but it is a feasable ending. I hate the 'loses his powers' ending because it is so bleak, but it does contain an element of selflessness and self-sacrific which is a theme that runs all though the story. I hate 'the noble death' because it will be like having a close personal friend die. If my best friend dies a heroes death, that doesn't make the lose any less, and perhaps makes it more. On the other hand, the 'happlily ever after' ending is about as predictable, mundane, and common as you can get. I can see Harry's last fighting as a long, agonizing, and painfull battle as so many of his battles have been, one that leaves him near dead, his spirit crushed, the cost of victory so desparately and miserably high, that all Harry wants to do is fade away and live in obscurity. To live a without ever hearing of war, dark wizards, and death again. All we can do is wait and see, but I see far more grim endings than happy ones. bboy_mn From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 08:11:09 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:11:09 -0000 Subject: Replay - Prophecy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85201 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "blueangelcvhp" > > I've never really understood why getting the prophecy was so > important to Voldemort. From the beginning he's been trying to kill > Harry so why was it so important to get the prophecy?It didn't > really tell us anything new or anything that would help Voldemort > defeat/kill Harry. It just seems that he spent the whole book trying > to get the thing for no real reason. It was a brilliant book and I > was thrilled with it the whole way through but I found the prophecy > a bit of a let down. Especially without knowing how or why the > Potter defied Voldemort or why he chose Harry not Neville. > > blueangelcvhp bboy_mn: What's the point of opening a Christmas or Birthday present when it just turns out to be a bad shirt or a bad tie? The point is, you don't know what's inside until you open it. The same principle applies to the prophecy, Voldemort wants it BECAUSE he doesn't know what it says. He is hoping it will reveal some weakness or some loophole by which he can gain some advantage over Harry. And it does contain some valuable, or at least significant, information, it could be interpreted to imply that Harry and only Harry can defeat him. It could be interpreted to imply, that Harry and Voldemort are pretty much invincible to everyone but each other. Although, for the most part ,none of that matters in OoP, because Voldemort has no way of know if the prophecy will or will not be usefull until he finds out what it says. During the last book, he is trying to stay in hiding while he searches for some way to gain an advantage. Now that his cover is blown, he has no reason to keep a low profile. Now he can pillage and plunder at will. The more he terrorized the wizard world, the more ineffective they will become at fighting him. Only those who remain calm and clear headed will have a chance of resisting him; Dumbledore=Yes, Ministry=No. Just a thought. bboy_mn From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Mon Nov 17 08:17:36 2003 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:17:36 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Whole Evans Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031117081736.32908.qmail@web25107.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85202 justcarol67 wrote: Tonks wrote: > I do not deny the possibility of a distant relative. But still, if Petunia is > Harry's 'ONLY' relative... doesn't this make for something interesting? > -Tonks I think Petunia is Harry's only *known* relative. Dumbledore isn't lying or exaggerating: he's speaking the truth as he knows it. Carol Now U_P_D The words are: UK PB Page15 "I've come to bring Harry to his aunt and uncle. They're the only family he has left now." This does not preclude Harry having other relatives. Petunia is same mum same dad (as far as we know). But if LP/PD's dad had a brother who was 15 or so years younger than him. Then Mark E could be Harrys First Cousin Udder Pendragon ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --------------------------------- Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ffionmiles at hotmail.com Mon Nov 17 08:58:27 2003 From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:58:27 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85203 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Abigail wrote: > > > Whether or not Headship is an academic distinction, I find > > it hard to believe that it would be bestowed on a trouble-maker - if > that were > > the case, why didn't Fred or George become Head Boy? They're both > > prodigiously talented wizards, as we can see from their ingenious > methods > > of resistance at the end of OOP. > > They're prodigiously talented but not academically inclined. Note that > they drop out before they take their N.E.W.T.S. and receive only three > O.W.L.S. apiece as compared with Percy's three, so they're not > candidates for Head Boy even if it's an appointed position and not > automatic, as I suspect it to be. And even if they were inclined in a > direction other than mischief, I think they'd have been passed over as > Prefects because either one twin would be chosen over the other > (imagine the jealousy of the twin who wasn't chosen and the breach in > their till then nearly frictionless relationship) or there'd be a > duplication of office. (Does this mean that Lee Jordan was the prefect > for their year? Can't be. We never see him in that capacity. There > must be some other Gryffindor boy of their age who's not mentioned.) > > Carol I'm sorry if I've missed this questio being answered at some point, but there's one thing that confuses me. Back in PS, hagrid said harry's parents were head boy and girl in their time, but in OofP, sirius says James wasn't a prefect - so can non-prefects become head boy? It is usually a continuation - head b/g chosen from the 6 prefects in the last year of school. Ffi From ratalman at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 08:59:26 2003 From: ratalman at yahoo.com (ratalman) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:59:26 -0000 Subject: Bellatrix Lestrange's French accent Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85204 In listening to Jim Dale read OoP (American version), I noted that he gave Bellatrix Lestrange what sounds to me like a French accent. Is there any canon to support that, or is Dale extrapolating an accent from her French-sounding surname? Robyn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 06:46:57 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 06:46:57 -0000 Subject: Endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85205 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Suzanne Chiles" wrote: > I think that after Harry defeats Voldemort in the great final battle, the > Ministry of Magic will offer him many accolades and any position in the MoM > he might want. Harry will thank them politely, say no, and become a > professional Quidditch player. Next to defeating Voldemort, I can't think of > anything that would make Harry happier than that. What about his own ambition to be an auror? I don't think dark wizardry will just disappear when Voldemort and the Death Eaters are defeated. Evil always exists in some form. Before Voldemort it was Grindelwold. Maybe the next one will be Draco (who will have to become a lot more formidable than he's appeared so far to be a worthy adversary, I'll admit). Maybe it's a little too pat, but he did state that as his ambition in his career counseling session with McGonagall. It seems to be the goal he, Ron, and Hermione were working toward. And if defeating Voldemort doesn't land him acceptance into auror training, I don't know what will. Carol, who thinks Harry is not called "The Boy Who Lived" for nothing From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 08:03:27 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:03:27 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85206 > I wrote: > Hardly anyone would buy the books once the word got out, so I > don't think her publisher would allow her to do it. And she cried > when she killed off Sirius, who barely qualifies as a major > character, and she's made it fairly clear that she won't kill off > Hagrid or Ron, so she probably feels even more strongly about killing > Harry. > > Erin responded: > There are so many things wrong with these statements I hardly even > know where to start :-) Carol: I believe you mean that you disagree with me. That's rather different from saying that my statements are "wrong." Let me try to put my opinions in perspective here despite being rather unhappy with the general tone of your responses. Erin wrote: > First off, I highly doubt that at this point her publisher has any > control over how the books will turn out. As you noted earlier, in a > part I snipped, she writes these books for herself. Period. If > Bloomsbury or Scholastic didn't like a certain plotline, she could > sell it to a different publisher in a hot second. Any of them would > leap to take it. Carol: I work in publishing and the publishers I know of are interested in making money. If they think that killing off a highly popular character will interfere with sales, they will reject the book as written. Yes, she can go to another publisher, but money counts with all of them--or at least with all the ones I work with. Rowling may be a special case, but I'm willing to bet that her current publishers have been given her word that she won't do anything that will cause a dropoff in readership. Publishers want books that sell. Period. Erin wrote: > And "hardly anyone would buy the books once the word got out" of > Harry dying? Can you truly believe that? I mean, a tragic ending > never stopped Romeo and Juliet from being popular. And there's a > certain new movie out that's selling pretty well despite the hero's > death at the end. Star Wars is still going strong although we all > realize the main guy is about to become Darth Vader. I think Harry > Potter would sell even if she had all the characters bite it and > Voldemort win at last. If you don't, perhaps you don't realize just > how big this thing really is. Carol: Yes, I truly believe that. The millions of children you mentioned in the snipped portion of this message are not going to want Harry to die, and if they find out that he does, they won't want to read the books. I'll read it because I want to find out what happens to Snape and certain other characters, but I think the children who idolize her now will feel betrayed and many will reject both her and her books. You are, of course, entitled to the opposite opinion. "Romeo and Juliet" is not a valid comparison because it's a play intended for an adult audience, not the last in a series of children's books with a secondary audience of adults. Theater goers didn't wait ten years (or whatever) to find out what happened to Romeo and Juliet. They knew at the outset that R and J was a romantic tragedy. And believe me, I do know how big this thing is. It's caught me, hasn't it? Erin wrote: > Next- Sirius not a major character?? The guy had a whole *book* > named after him. Harry regarded him as a mixture of father and > brother. Probably only Ron or Hermione's death could have hurt him > more. How much more major do you want? Carol: Sirius, though he's the title character in PoA, was deliberately misrepresented throughout that book and appeared in his proper person only very near the end. He was a distant face and voice in GoF and was present in OoP only in the Grimmauld Place chapters and in the DoM battle in which he was killed. He is not a major character to the same degree as Ron or Hermione or for that matter Snape, who has grown and developed through all the books as is as much a part of Hogwarts as Dumbledore. I do agree with your statement that only Ron's or Hermione's deaths would have hurt Harry more than Sirirus's. That does not make him a major character, however, and he is clearly expendable regardless of his popularity on this list and elsewhere. > > I wrote: > Only an author who can't think of a way to weave all the loose > ends into the fabric of the story kills off the protagonist and > considers it a denouement. > > Erin responded: > Actually, having the hero die is a classic... oh, I can't really > explain it properly, but you should definitely read Joseph > Campbell's "The Hero With A Thousand Faces" to get a better > understanding of why so many heros end up biting it. It has to do > with the whole heroic journey thing. I will limit myself to asking > if you consider Shakespeare to be a substandard author, since several > of his plays end as tragedies? Carol: I have a PhD in English, so I know a bit about tragedy, and of course I don't consider Shakespeare to be a substandard author. The Harry Potter series is not a tragedy in either its structure or its subject matter. If we're looking at genres, I would classify it as part fantasy novel, part epic, and part bildungsroman. It's late and I'm tired so I hope I have answered this post articulately and politely, if not to Erin's complete satisfaction. I almost left it unanswered. P.S. I accidentally snipped the part about Hagrid. I read in an interview, which I naturally can't find at the moment, that JKR had no intention of killing him off. I didn't invent the idea, you can be sure. Carol From nibleswik at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 08:10:01 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:10:01 -0000 Subject: Predictions-Plot devises in 6 & 7 In-Reply-To: <00bc01c3ac5f$6de8cdb0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85207 > There are some things we have seen mentioned or used in small ways, that I > think will be big plot devises used in the next two books. > > > 2. Imperius curse- Why have this be one of three > unforgivable curses if it isn't going to be used in a big way. Me (Natalie): The reasoning for making Imperius unforgivable seems pretty clear. JKR's world (and the RW) hinges on choice. Since the Imperius disables the victim from making choices, from acting the way he or she wishes, in a way it steals the world from the victim, just like death or unfathomable pain. Also, it's already been used in a big way. It was central to the plot of GoF. That said, yes, it could be used again. Percy could be acting under Imperius (though I've decided he's probably just being a humongous bighead). Others could be put under it, but there are some characters I think we won't see Imperio'd, at least not effectively. Harry's the first -- you said: "Maybe even Harry will be used in this way. That way we would get a first person account of what it feels like to fall under this curse. I know he threw it off with Fake Moody, but what if Voldemrt cast it himself?" But Voldemort *did* cast it on Harry. He cast it on him in the graveyard, and Harry threw it off. As the only wizard more powerful than LV appears to be DD, I doubt Harry has much to fear as far as the Imperius. I can't see a situation in which the headmaster would cast it on Harry. I suppose there could be some wizards who were overall less powerful than Moldy Voldy, but better at the Imperius, or that Voldy wasn't really trying in the graveyard. I suppose he was out of practice as well. Others I don't think could be Imperio'd: DD (who could manage it?), Lucius Malfoy (I just can't see anyone controlling him via any method other than murder or very secure imprisonment), and Snape (I don't think we've seen just how powerful he is yet). And Dobby. Joj: > 4. Colin's pictures- I think he's going to capture > something important one of these days, or maybe he already has, > and doesn't even know it. Now that's interesting! I haven't ever thought much about Colin and his pictures, but now that I think about it, they probably will turn out valuable. As someone on this list noted (Pippin in the OotP ch. 5 discussion questions post, perhaps?), this truly is a war of spies. If it were different, if the war revolved around big guns, I'd disagree with you, but I think his photographs will do one of three things: help the good guys by capturing an image of something LV's hiding, something in LV's plans; help LV when he captures Colin and gets pictures documenting (for example) Ron's fear of spiders, which he will then use in some way that may cost someone (Ron?) his life; or help the good guys as evidence they show the Ministry, or use in eventual court cases against LV and the DEs. Oh, excitement! I'm also interested in the implications of Metamorphmagus-hood. Why is this going to be important? Is Tonks a fantastic Occlumens who will be able to infiltrate LV's organization, posing as Bellatrix, and get valuable information? Has she already been spying in this capacity? Some have brought up the possibility of Harry being a Metamorphmagus. I can't say I see a whole lot of canon evidence for that; in fact, the only thing I can think of is his fast-growing hair. Nevertheless, I wonder if that will turn out the case. I wonder if JKR is going to further explore Animagi. Are the Marauders, Rita, and McGonagall the only ones, or will there be more? Will the Trio or any other students become Animagi? If so, why? Where's that going? Finally, Legilimency and Occlumency. I'll be very surprised if they aren't central to the last two books. Is Harry going to resume his training in Occlumency? Is Dumbledore going to teach him, or is Snape? Is he going to be the only one studying it, or will Ron, Hermione, Neville, Ginny, and Luna join the class? Perhaps Harry will have to study it with Draco (yes, I realize there would need to be serious justification for why Draco was being taught Occlumency, but I'm hoping he'll choose Snape's good influence over his father's bad one and maybe even kill Lucius. Wouldn't that be uber-angsty in a very good way?). I think that would be worthwhile just to see that much revulsion in one room, undiluted by the presence of other students. Will Harry become a Legilimens? Natalie, who is now very wondry From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 17 11:27:06 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:27:06 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85208 Blueangel wrote: I found the prophecy a bit of a let down. Especially without knowing how or why the Potter defied Voldemort or why he chose Harry not Neville. Me: But we do know why he chose Harry rather than Neville. Dumbledore's words in OoP: "He saw himself in you before he had even seen you." Berit From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 17 11:36:53 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:36:53 -0000 Subject: DE's touching Harry Was: Re: The Case for Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85209 Pippin wrote: Lupin touches Harry for the first time when Harry is unconscious. "Lupin was tapping Harry hard on the face" PoA ch. 12. If he was afraid of a violent reaction that would be the safe way to go about it. No wizard, not even Dumbledore apparently, knows exactly how the ancient magic, "magic at its deepest, its most impenetrable" really works. It behooves ESE!Lupin to be cautious, since he is the first DE to touch Harry since Quirrell suffered immolation. But since Lupin was able to touch Harry, the other DE's could then do so, either because the magic doesn't work unless Voldemort is actually possessing them, or because Voldemort used Harry's blood to re-embody himself. Me: I don't have the reference, but I believe Dumbledore explained to Harry why Quirrel couldn't touch him without suffering: It was because Voldemort was in direct contact with him, riding on the back of his head. Had Quirrel been on his own with no Voldie stuck to the top of his head, he could freely have touched Harry without hurting himself. It is Voldemort who can't (couldn't) touch Harry without experiencing pain (because of Lily's protection), just like Harry's scar burns painfully whenever Voldemor is nearby. So this has nothing to do with Death Eater's not being able to touch Harry, it has rather got to do with the special connection forged between Voldemort and Harry. (And I am really puzzled some readers can see cannon evidence for Lupin being a Death Eater... :-) Berit From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 17 11:39:21 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:39:21 -0000 Subject: Phineas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85210 Carol wrote: > > If Phineas is right, we really ought to give up all attempts to place > Sirius in Slytherin. Not that he's stupid, far from it, but he's brave > to the point of recklessness and he dies trying to save Harry's neck, > not his own. (I think Sirius's definition of "stupid" would clash with > his great-great-grandfather's.) Me: I totally agree with you Carol :-) Rash, impulsive, reckless, boisterous, brave Sirius was a true Gryffindor :-)) Berit From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 17 11:49:10 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:49:10 -0000 Subject: Endings - OT Side Note - Comedy vs Tragedy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85211 Bboy_mn wrote: > I'm not making a comment ABOUT you, I am making a comment TO you, and > that comment is, that a significant portion of the world really does > love a good tragedy. > Point taken, but I never said 'all' or 'a mojority', only that > substantial amount of people of shared culture, do like tragedies. > With reference to Europe, I even left an element of doubt, as to how > wide spread it was, and apealed to more knowledgable people to clarify. Me: You know, I really agree with you on all points. It's true that in many cultures a good tragedy is appreciated. I don't like to admit it (because I am the romantic type who at least figuratively wants the hero to ride into the sunset accompanied by the love of his life), but even I can appreciate a good tragedy :-) But it would have to be a GOOD tragig ending, not a pointless one. And yes, Harry dying for his friends would be a sad but meaningful ending... :-( Harry being stripped of his magical abilities for never again to return to the world he loves would not qualify, in my opinion. Berit From o_caipora at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 12:28:54 2003 From: o_caipora at yahoo.com (o_caipora) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 12:28:54 -0000 Subject: Howgarts Clubs ( was Ignorance and the Toad) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85212 I wrote: >> Many universities have glee clubs or other singing groups (such >> as the Wiffenpoofs) that are entirely student run. "Nora Renka" said: > Being as I am currently a Yalie of sorts (but a Graduate one), I > can tell you that the Whiffenpoofs and other groups are selected > experienced singers, who are able to sing without a director and in > complex harmony because they really know what they're doing. and Nora is correct. The Whiffs were a bad example: they're all seniors, chosen competively from students who've sung in less well known groups for three years already. But AFAIK many of those groups do pick freshman. The Wiffenpoofs just came to mind, being well known, and across the alley from the thread topic. Nora said: > We find > it so easy to sing by ear only because we've been raised from birth > in these systems which have been standardized. Take away the piano > and try to teach a bunch of kids to sing part-music by ear, and > it's wildly difficult. The wildly different tempos at which the Hogwarts anthem is sung are surely easier to cure than bad pitch? The diversity there, and the tolerace of it, may be telling. Whatever bad things one can say about North Korea, they're marvelous at organizing mass exibitions of people moving in perfect uniformity. Given all the bad of North Korea (and similar societies) that's reason alone to suspect that those things they are good at are probably bad things. I think that there's an idealogical message to the anthem, that Rowling is saying that there's room for diversity in joyous voices raised in a hymn to a common cause. Surely that's the books main message. Me: > > No doubt real magic would have similar effects, though I can't > > imagine just what. Nora: > The ability of magical reproduction seems to > me to kill imagination, in that area. [snip] > And to end on another slightly off-topic note, I might be able to > accept that magic could change a voice into a Hochdramatische Wagner > soprano (a much, much prized but very rare voice type) Speaking of magic, voice and reproduction, do you think a spell could let a man sing Idomeneo's son as written, without the early sacrifices needed in the Muggle world? > There's a lot to art that > magic couldn't possibly do, and I suspect that it has had a > stultifying affect on the development of the fine arts. We know from the MOM lobby that the WW is big enough to have at one time supported a scultor, though not a good one. Although political sculpture in the Muggle world shares a lot with the MOM's decorative choices. > -Nora gets back to writing on Strauss' Intermezzo... That was an Intermezzo intermission? Cheers, Caipora From rredordead at aol.com Mon Nov 17 13:15:36 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 13:15:36 -0000 Subject: Please help with a short Dementor question. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85213 Help! Did I read somewhere in OotP that the Dementors had left Azkaban and joined Voldemort? I do remember the mass breakout of Death Eaters in Chapter 25 "The Beetle At Bay", but I can't recall if it was because the Dementors had left the prison leaving it open for the prisoners to escape? Does anyone remember if the Dementors departure is canon? If so can you give me a page quote? Or perhaps it's some theory I read somewhere? I've tried the Lexicon but no luck. Thanks Mandy From lunatique0619 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 13:14:43 2003 From: lunatique0619 at yahoo.com (Jee H. Lee) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 05:14:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Get yer piping hot Snape Theory right here... Message-ID: <20031117131443.20060.qmail@web13103.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85214 > But mostly, it's this: "I trust Severus Snape" is simply > incompatible with "But I'm worried that if I let him near > a 'Ridiculus' spell, he'll freak out and rejoin Voldemort." Yeah, that bothered me, too. I agree the "recovering alcoholics" hypothesis doesn't really hold water. (Begging pardon for the implied metaphor.. :) Sydney: > So, Slytherin that he is, he sneakily places the jinx on the > job he immediately assumed he'll be offered: Defence against Dark > Arts, what he was famous for at school. > > But Dumbledore, super-sneaky guy that HE is, fakes him out and puts > him in Potions instead. So now Snape is stuck-- bound by his duty > to Dumbledore. I like this theory, because it explains things much better than "recovering alcoholic." I imagine the two most obvious questions would be: 1. How to place a jinx on a job? and 2. If Snape could place the jinx on DADA, why not on Potions? Therefore, my modification to the Great Snape Theory would be this: Throughout the books it has been made clear that magic is much more than what is done with wands and incantations. The most prominent example is Lily's sacrifice for Harry--in that case, love was the magic, though there was no wand-waving and no spell. There are also the bonds formed when one wizard saves another's life, between Harry-Pettigrew, James-Snape, Snape-Harry etc. This is all "deep magic," if you like, that has nothing to do with the technical details of casting and everything to do with the fabric of human life. Maybe the "jinx" on the DADA position is similar. It wasn't placed intentionally by anyone, but events and emotions surrounding the class and the teachers led up to the present state of affairs. In other words, bad vibes. :) That would resolve the two questions I posed above: The DADA jinx was a form of deep magic you couldn't just wave a wand to cast, which was why Snape couldn't similarly jinx the Potions position. The hypothesis that Snape is asking Dumbledore "NOW can I leave?" by applying to DADA still stands. And, of course, Dumbledore's turning him down year after year would be his way of saying "Nope." Incidentally, this line of reasoning leads to another interesting question--is Snape trying to jinx the Potions position by creating such a miasma of fear and unpleasantness around it? If anyone knows about affecting this kind of magic it would be Snape, the Dark Arts aficionado. So, following through with this modified theory, there's a fine balance being held here. Not a balance of tranquility, but a dynamic balance struck between the opposing wills of the two men. Snape wants to leave; Dumbledore wants him to stay. Snape applies for the jinxed position; Dumbledore won't let him have it. Snape tries to jinx his own position; Dumbledore lets him, as if to see how far he'd go. It's like an ongoing game, and I wouldn't be surprised if they secretly and guiltily enjoyed it. I, too, await the canon fire. :) -Lunatique __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From astrid at netspace.net.au Mon Nov 17 04:34:48 2003 From: astrid at netspace.net.au (Astrid Wootton) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:34:48 +1100 Subject: Boarding schools in UK Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85215 There have been a few invitations to those who have experienced schooling comparable to Hogwarts to join the discussions. I was at a girl?s Public (Independent) School in the UK and later taught in an Independent Girl?s School in Australia. My schooling in UK was in the early 50?s, so not entirely relevant to Hogwarts in the 90?s. But there is something about Hogwarts that reads like a traditional and slightly old fashioned environment, in some ways. It?s possible, therefore, to make some comparisons. Picking up earlier threads: our school uniforms (navy) were brightened up by our school ties in House colours, as were the linings of our hoods in the ankle length cloaks which we wore outside. There were 10 houses with 35 students in each. So a school of about 350. Hogwarts reads very like our school numbers, although each of the 4 houses had more students at Hogwarts . I am convinced that ?about 1000 students? is a flint. (I had arrived at that conclusion before I had joined up to HPforGrownUps and was pleased to gather that a number of other people had also reached this conclusion, based on the same data..) We had a range of differently sized dormitories and we moved dormitories each term to prevent close relationships developing. Each student had their beds in a cubicle within the dormitory, and it was a serious infringement of the rules to enter another student?s cubicle under any circumstances. The thin mattresses were of horsehair, and each term was marked by trying to fit your body to the impression in the mattress left by the previous term?s incumbent. I remember well that on cold nights if you had a glass of water by your bed, it would freeze over by the morning. (Rationing imposed during the Second World War was still in effect: so no fuel for central heating of any sort!) Each House had its own common rooms and some of these were very grand, One house for instance having a wonderful old ballroom with a magnificent painted ceiling. My House was originally a Tudor farmhouse, on the main route at that time between Stratford and London. I like to think of Shakespeare walking past? but I digress!) Lunch was served to all the students, in the large dining hall, each House with its own house table, seating 35 plus house teacher. This was similar to the Hogwarts dining room, but without the university style teachers? table across the top of the hall. Breakfast and the evening meal were served in our own house dining room. Classes: With 50 students at each year level across those 10 houses, there were several classes and students from all the houses studied together. I seem to remember that there were about 15 to 20 in each class: say 3 streams. House Prefects were decided by the house mistress, who took advice from the current Head of House ? a senior prefect. As I remember we had several House Prefects maybe two or three, and a Head of House. I can?t remember whether we also had Head of School, but I assume there would have been and she would have been selected by the School Principal, on advice from the House Teachers. Control at night time was significantly different from Hogwarts. We had Earlybeds and Latebeds. Earlybeds in bed by 8.30, and latebeds by 9.30. Prefects were allowed up until 10.00. This was strictly regulated. Things were significantly different in Australia. I taught at a girls independent school with 2,500 students of whom only a few were boarders (about 100 ). There were 5 Houses. The house colours were not worn on a day by day basis, but at a sporting event house colours and accompanying props and costumes were very much a quiddich type affair. The roaring lion brought to the match by Luna in OoP rang very close to nature! Prefects were not selected according to their house. They were decided at the end of the year by students in Year 11 choosing from among their peers: they would all be in Year 12 the following year. From among those selected 2 or occasionally 3 would be Head of School. There were a number of tasks for the Heads of School including representing the school on official occasions. There was no school dining room as such (though the boarders had one). Houses were very large and there was not the same feeling of identity as described at Hogwarts. However sports, music, drama and other competitive events were house events. These seem to me to be the main Hogwarts- related points. Astrid Admin note: If you wish to respond to any of the non-Hogwarts related issues in this post, please move the thread to OT Chatter at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/ From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 13:32:44 2003 From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 05:32:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Please help with a short Dementor question. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031117133244.79781.qmail@web60204.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85216 Eowynn: on pg 851, chapter 38 The Second War Begins. Draco has just confronted Harry : "You think you're such a big man, Potter," said Malfoy,advancing now, Crabbe and Goyle flanking him. "You wait.I'll have you. You can't land my father in prison-" "I thought I just had," said Harry. "The dementors have left Azkaban," said Malfoy quietly." Dad and the others will be out in no time..." It doesn't say whether they have joined with Voldemort though I thought that it did say that somewhere. I'll keep looking. Hope this helped Eowynn. ghinghapuss wrote: Help! Did I read somewhere in OotP that the Dementors had left Azkaban and joined Voldemort? I do remember the mass breakout of Death Eaters in Chapter 25 "The Beetle At Bay", but I can't recall if it was because the Dementors had left the prison leaving it open for the prisoners to escape? Does anyone remember if the Dementors departure is canon? If so can you give me a page quote? Or perhaps it's some theory I read somewhere? I've tried the Lexicon but no luck. Thanks Mandy --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rredordead at aol.com Mon Nov 17 13:48:14 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 13:48:14 -0000 Subject: Bellatrix Lestrange's French accent In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85217 > Robyn wrote: > In listening to Jim Dale read OoP (American version), I noted that > he gave Bellatrix Lestrange what sounds to me like a French > accent. Is there any canon to support that, or is Dale > extrapolating an accent from her French-sounding surname? Now me: He must be extrapolating based on her last name. Bellatrix Black Lestrange a Frenchie! Oh no, no, no! We know Bellatrix is a Black. A British Pureblooded Wizarding family. Now perhaps the Leastrange's are French. A dark magical family whose sons relocated to England to follow Voldemort, but it wouldn't mean Bella has an accent. Even if she had been educated at Beauxbatons, where she could have potentially met the Lestranges, (although I doubt it) it wouldn't mean our Bella has a French accent. Notice the 'our' Bella? Yes! I'm claiming Bellatrix to be undoubtedly a fellow English woman! Who else would be so fanatical? The Germans perhaps, but not the French! However, I will concede the Lestranges are not the only pureblooded family to have a French sounding name. There is also the Malfoy family. And Voldemort is suspiciously French sounding, although he made that up. Perhaps all the higher-class pure bloods are of French origin, in the same way all the English aristocracy were Normans back in the 11th century. But again it wouldn't give them a French accent, anymore than the Queen speaks with a French accent! Tosh Bosh! My last thought on this matter is if the British purebloods are so fanatical about being 'pureblooded' I can't see them owing up to having any damned foreign blood in their veins! No, no, no those Frenchies have their own wizarding aristocracy. And can keep their smelly garlic mitts of ours! ;-) Mandy. From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Mon Nov 17 13:47:47 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:47:47 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Percey Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? References: Message-ID: <000c01c3ad11$62e59c10$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85218 Mandy said: Percy Weasley is acting under the Imperius all through OotP. He is not so drastically different that his family are completely surprised by his actions and yet he is operating and making decisions that are somewhat out of character for a beloved son of the Weasley household. After all, it is ok to disagree with your family, but to turn your back on your father publicly the way Percy does after Harry trial in OotP is a terribly slur and while Percy is a Humongous Bighead and supports the Minister unquestionably, he does also respect and love his parents. Also Percy's letter to Ron contains enough of Percy for his own brother to accept it is him but I have never known Percy to interfere with his younger brother in such a direct way before. The Percy Weasley in OotP so far beyond the Percy in earlier books. Joj now: I think that makes more sense than evil!Percy. I can but Percy having a spat over differences of opinion about the MoM, but Percy's behavior far exceeds his job ambitiousness he'd shown previously. It's one thing to not send any presents to his family for Christmas, but quite another to send the gift he received back. A slap in the face, if you would. I think his behavior towards Harry is strange also. He acts as though Harry is a stranger, not a friend, which I think he was. I know Percy was ambitious, but lets not forget, he was in Gryffindor, not Slytherin. That means he must have bravery in him, right? So he's either under the imperious curse, or he's a spy? Right? (shrug) Joj [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Mon Nov 17 14:02:37 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 09:02:37 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Muggles in the Wizarding World References: Message-ID: <001401c3ad13$75008ca0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85219 ----- Original Message ----- From: Wendy I'm also curious about transporation. Portkeys - it is the Portkey that is magical, or it is the combination of Portkey and magical person that matters? I tend to think that anyone could travel by Portkey (including Muggles). I'm less certain that Floo could be used by Muggles, though. Now Joj: That's a very good question. I can see portkeys working for muggles. Wouldn't be that big a deal. You just touch it. Floo powder, you throw it and state your location. It seems more like doing actual magic. I can't really picture a muggle doing it. GoF pg. 70 US edition "What sort of objects are portkeys? said Harry curiously. "Well, they can be anything," said Mr. Weasley. "Unobtrusive things, obviously, so muggles don't go picking them up and playing with them...stuff they'll just think is litter...." It's not clear whether Mr. Weasley is worried about the muggles picking up the portkey's and accidentally being transported, or if he's worried they'll move them or take them, messing it up for the wizards. I tend to think the later. But who knows? Joj "Going to a church doesn't make you a Christian any more than standing in a garage makes you a car" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sydenmill at msn.com Mon Nov 17 14:24:50 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 14:24:50 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85220 Blueangel wrote in post #85185: > I found the prophecy a bit of a let down. Especially without > knowing how or why the Potter defied Voldemort or why he chose > Harry not Neville. Berit wrote, in post #85028: > But we do know why he chose Harry rather than Neville. Dumbledore's > words in OoP: "He saw himself in you before he had even seen you." Bohcoo adds, from post #78003: >From "Movie Magic, Life Story" magazine, Deluxe Collector's Edition, an article entitled, "Creating Harry," "Exploring Themes:" JKR: "I think it is often the case that the biggest bullies take what they know to be their own defects, as they see it, and they put them on someone else and then try and destroy the other. That's what Voldemort does." OOP, ch. 37, page 842, American edition: Dumbledore speaking to Harry: "And notice this, Harry. He chose, not the pureblood (which, according to his creed, is the only kind of wizard worth being or knowing), but the half-blood, like himself. He saw himself in you before he had ever seen you." When Voldemort marked Harry as his "equal" it was in everything loathsome he saw in himself. With all these abhorrent qualities about himself projected onto Harry, in his mind, Voldemort stands a chance of destroying them by destroying Harry. Now Neville, on the other hand, represents everything Voldemort WANTS: Pureblood status and what sounds like a large, tightly-knit, loving family. Why destroy a representation of that? I sense another of Lord Thingy's infamous, "But, alas, I declare myself mistaken, I have made a mistake. . ." speeches, don't you? Bohcoo From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Mon Nov 17 14:51:22 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:51:22 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lupin and Leadership (was: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge) References: Message-ID: <005301c3ad1a$45ae1f60$2ac53841@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 85221 > Since Neville has to deal with Snape far more often than he has > to deal with boggarts, it's a net loss, IMO. Iggy here: It's interesting to note, though, that Neville can actually help himself out if he ever realizes that he can deal with Snape much like he dealt with the boggart. (Not in pointing his wand and shouting "riddikulus", of course.) Much like intimidation of public speaking, he can alleviate the fear Snape causes in him by picturing Snape in his Gran's clothes. This will cause him to see Snape in a much less intimidating manner and will relax him a lot more. Hopefully, the increased confidence he gets from his adventure in the MoM, and doing so well in the DA as well as Herbology will help him out as well. Here's to hoping. Iggy McSnurd From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Nov 17 15:14:07 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:14:07 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85222 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > I work in publishing and the publishers I know of are interested in > making money. If they think that killing off a highly popular > character will interfere with sales, they will reject the book as > written. Yes, she can go to another publisher, but money counts with > all of them--or at least with all the ones I work with. Rowling may be > a special case, but I'm willing to bet that her current publishers > have been given her word that she won't do anything that will cause a > dropoff in readership. Publishers want books that sell. Period. Jen: I found this quote from JKR, 1999 in The Connection (Quick Quotes Archive): "the bottom line is I can't be led by what people want me to write, I have to write what I want to write --- that's just the way it's got to be. I've got to write what I want to write. If by Book 6, I'm only writing to 6 people and I've lost everyone else, yeah, I'm going to be sorry about that, but I will feel that I have to stand by what I want to do.....I'm not writing to order here, so I'm going to be sorry if children don't want to keep up with Harry." Here's another quote from the Columbus Dispatch in 1999: "It's heartwarming that people care enough about them to want them not to get hurt, but at the same time I have the absolute right to do what I like to my story and characters. I'm not going to write to order. I've planned the whole story, and I've always known who was going to die and who was going to come through unscathed, and I'm not going to deviate from that." (Both articles on Quick Quotes) Now, call me naive, but I think if it came to the publishers nixing JKR's story she would either find other publishers or stop writing and take the consequences. Through all the fire-storm of "not enough female characters", "plagarism", "these evil books should be censored", JKR has told *her* story. > Carol: > Sirius, though he's the title character in PoA, was deliberately > misrepresented throughout that book and appeared in his proper person > only very near the end. He was a distant face and voice in GoF and was > present in OoP only in the Grimmauld Place chapters and in the DoM > battle in which he was killed. He is not a major character to the same > degree as Ron or Hermione or for that matter Snape, who has grown and > developed through all the books as is as much a part of Hogwarts as > Dumbledore. I do agree with your statement that only Ron's or > Hermione's deaths would have hurt Harry more than Sirirus's. That does > not make him a major character, however, and he is clearly expendable > regardless of his popularity on this list and elsewhere. Jen: I don't see how Sirius dying equals his character being expendable. His major role in the story arc was to give us information no other character could give. He and Pettigrew alone held the valuable information that they switched as Secret Keepers, and that Pettigrew was actually the spy. Without Black escaping Azkaban, no one would ever be the wiser that Wormtail was alive and living in Harry's dorm. Also, Sirius and Lupin are the only initmate connection Harry has to James and Lily. Those characters bring his parents alive in a way no one else can, because they were intimate friends. Snape may have memories of James and Lily, Dumbledore has great respect for them, but their perspectives on James and Lily come from a very different place--not the deep love Sirius and Lupin hold for them. Little details like Sirius running away from home but mentioning he was "always welcome for Sunday dinner at the Potters" or the fact that Lily and James didn't feel love at first sight (to say the least). Or Sirius and Lupin talking endearingly about James ruffling up his hair, when Harry viewed it as annoyingly arrogant. Carol: > P.S. I accidentally snipped the part about Hagrid. I read in an > interview, which I naturally can't find at the moment, that JKR had no > intention of killing him off. I didn't invent the idea, you can be sure. Jen: I vaguely remember that too. All I could find was this quote: "You've said in interviews that there will be casualties in the Harry Potter series. Now, everyone at a web site I visit says someone (probably Hagrid) will die in Book 4. Will someone die or is this a terrible rumor? I love Hagrid! It is true that there will be deaths in Book 4 for the first time. It is likely that the reader will only care about one of the deaths. I can't say who it is, but I have certainly never told anyone that it's Hagrid -- hint, hint." http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/1999/0999- barnesnoble-staff.htm From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 17 15:17:55 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:17:55 -0000 Subject: Please help with a short Dementor question. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85223 Mandy wrote: Help! Did I read somewhere in OotP that the Dementors had left Azkaban and joined Voldemort? I do remember the mass breakout of Death Eaters in Chapter 25 "The Beetle At Bay", but I can't recall if it was because the Dementors had left the prison leaving it open for the prisoners to escape? Does anyone remember if the Dementors departure is canon? If so can you give me a page quote? Me: The dementors getting out of Ministry control is canon. I found these two quotes, but noen of them states specifically that the Dementors left Azkaban, just that they seem to be less dedicated in keeping their prisoners at bay... Quote: "I don't believe this," snarled Harry, "Fudge is blaming the breakout [of the DE's] on Sirius?" "What other options does he have?" said Hermione bitterly. "He can hardly say, "sorry, everyone, Dumbledore warned me this might happen, the Azkaban guards have joined Voldemort... and now Voldemort's worst supporters have broken out too." (OoP p.481-482 Brit. Vers.) And: Quote: "It's funny, isn't it," said Cho in a low voice, gazing up at the pictures of the Death Eaters, "remember when that Sirius Black escaped, there were Dementors all over Hogsmeade looking for him? And now ten Death Eaters are on the loose and there are no Dementors anywhere..." ...Now he [Harry] came to think about it, their absence was highly significant. They had not only let ten Death Eaters escape, they weren't bothering to look for them ... it looked as though they really were outside Ministry control now. (OoP p. 493 Brit. Vers.) Berit From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Nov 17 15:29:19 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:29:19 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85224 On several different threads I've seen comments about how someone couldn't be evil because they were in Gryffindor, or that person *is* evil so they must have been in Slytherin. Why does the Sorting Hat decision at age 11 mean you will have those characteristics your entire life? Personally, I'd like to find out MWPP were in Slytherin or someone from Gryffindor is a betrayer. Meaning all the houses have postitive and negative characteristics, and that being in a certain house doesn't predetermine your entire existence. It is canon that there were a group of Slytherins in the MWPP era who all became DE's, but that seems to be the extent of generalizations we can make about a group of students in one house (correct me if I'm wrong). From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 17 15:14:33 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:14:33 -0000 Subject: Endings - OT Side Note - Comedy vs Tragedy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85225 bboy_mn > On the other hand, the 'happlily ever after' ending is about as > predictable, mundane, and common as you can get. > > I can see Harry's last fighting as a long, agonizing, and painfull > battle as so many of his battles have been, one that leaves him near > dead, his spirit crushed, the cost of victory so desparately and > miserably high, that all Harry wants to do is fade away and live in > obscurity. To live a without ever hearing of war, dark wizards, and > death again. > > All we can do is wait and see, but I see far more grim endings than > happy ones. Geoff: Which, in passing, brings us back to Frodo, whose post-Ring situation I commented on the other day. I would be happy to see a situation somewhere between the "happy ever after" and the rather grim scenario you have just painted. Theory follows..... Many of my ideas occur to me while sitting in the bath and cogitating. (Turn your minds off - I said cogitating!). So thus this morning at about 7.50 am of the clock. JKR is, I believe, on record as saying that our Harry will not become a teacher at Hogwarts. I suddenly wondered whether this is another of JKR's renowned Communist fish. Why? Harry's story is supposedly going up to the end of his Sixth Form at Hogwarts in Book 7. but, at that point, he would not be old enough or qualiifed enough to be a teacher anyway. Could it conceivably be that he will say "I am going on to train to become a teacher at the school?" JKR would be correct insofar that he has not (yet) become a teacher at Hogwarts and it also removes the need to ride off into the sunset. Hmmmm. "Fascinating" as Data would say. Geoff Dearly hoping that Mark Evans will prove to be a relative of Harry's. Dearly hoping that Harry survives Book 7. From michaeljacksonfan1970 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 15:42:49 2003 From: michaeljacksonfan1970 at yahoo.com (michaeljacksonfan1970) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 15:42:49 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85226 Carol wrote: > > Hardly anyone would buy the books once the word got out, so I > > don't think her publisher would allow her to do it. And she cried > > when she killed off Sirius, who barely qualifies as a major > > character, and she's made it fairly clear that she won't kill off > > Hagrid or Ron, so she probably feels even more strongly about killing > > Harry. I think she might kill Harry, since we know she doesn't want to write book 8. If she kills him by having him fall through a veil, it wouldn't' be so bad. > Carol: > I work in publishing and the publishers I know of are interested in > making money. If they think that killing off a highly popular > character will interfere with sales, they will reject the book as > written. Yes, she can go to another publisher, but money counts with > all of them--or at least with all the ones I work with. Rowling may be > a special case, but I'm willing to bet that her current publishers > have been given her word that she won't do anything that will cause a > dropoff in readership. Publishers want books that sell. Period. Yes, but by the time Harry dies, the readers will be all grown up. They won't mind, so it won't kill off sales. Then Carol said: > P.S. I accidentally snipped the part about Hagrid. I read in an > interview, which I naturally can't find at the moment, that JKR had >no intention of killing him off. I didn't invent the idea, you can be >sure. JKR said something about this a few years back, but I don't remember much about it. I thought she said it was more likely that she would kill him, though. ~Madeline From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Mon Nov 17 16:21:43 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 11:21:43 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life References: Message-ID: <001001c3ad26$e39cc350$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85227 ----- Original Message ----- From: Jen Reese On several different threads I've seen comments about how someone couldn't be evil because they were in Gryffindor, or that person *is* evil so they must have been in Slytherin. Joj: I commented this morning about Percy being in Gryffindor and not Slytherin. What I was saying was that so far, all we have seen is Percy's Slytherin quality (ambition), but we haven't seen his Gryffindor bravery yet. He is in Gryffindor, so it should follow that he's at least somewhat brave. Even Neville has shown more bravery. I think Percy is undercover myself. Jen again: Personally, I'd like to find out MWPP were in Slytherin or someone from Gryffindor is a betrayer. Joj: I personally think MWPP were all in Slytherin. I like to imagine us finding this out when Harry asks Lupin point blank if they were. JKR wouldn't have been so careful to not say they were in Gryffindor, if she was going to make it that way. Why be so careful in all 5 books and all interviews, to never say what houses they were in, to do the obvious? It's not her style. Joj "If you look like you're passport photo, you probably need the trip" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rredordead at aol.com Mon Nov 17 16:47:46 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:47:46 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Army Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85228 It seems to me that Voldemort has the potential to have a formidable army amassing somewhere in the background. Principally, where have the Dementors have gone and just who is left to guard the Wizard prison? Draco tells Harry at the end of OotP that the Dementors have left Azkaban Prison. (pg 851, chapter 38) Thanks Eowynn for that page quote. Where have they gone? I can see two possibilities: Either rallying behind The Dark Lord or running loose around Britain. If they are rallying behind Voldemort where are they and how will he use them? As an invading army? To force the Ministry to do his bidding? Or to simply control the WW? Any of those options seem likely to me. We don't know whether the Dementors guarded Azkaban willingly or were forced to by the ministry as a way for the ministry to control the Dementor population. Whatever the reason they seemed to have a `good' life, for a Dementor at least, working the halls of the Wizard prison. Plenty of humans to feed on, despair and misery everywhere and the occasional soul to suck out. So why leave? What has Voldemort offered them? An incentive bigger then the deal they have with the ministry. Unlimited muggles to feed off of when ever they want to? It would be a convenient way to get rid of some of the annoying muggle population. And they may be happy to offer their assistance to the Dark Lord if there are plenty of souls to feed upon and a war within the WW would provide that reward. Or if they are simply running loose couldn't this also potentially serve LV? If the Dementors caused enough of a menace used the entire Auror population to keep them under control, and distracted the WW enough, Voldemort could slip right in under their noses. It could even give him a legitimate reason to step up and `offer his assistance to save the populous from this evil menace.' Just imagine we have Dementors running loose causing mayhem and sucking souls out of innocent muggles and wizards it's enough of a scandal to potentially bring down the Ministry. Dumbledore could be implicated by the fact he `allowed' Dementors to guard Hogwarts from Sirius Black and Voldemort could step in and offer a convenient solution to the Dementor problem. The WW would be so desperate they might just be willing to accept the proposal. What ever the reason for their departure from Azkaban, one thing we do know is they have left, so who is there to guard the prison? The most logical choice would be the Aurors. Trained Dark Wizards hunters, the wizard police force. They seem to be the most logical choice and the most trained and capable to handle the job. But how many Aurors are there? During the last 10 years of peace the chances are Fudge and the Ministry haven't invested money into a large police force and why should they when the threat of He Who Must Not Be Named had been vanquished. So if the WW has their best and brightest Aurors guarding a prison just who is left to guard the WW? It looks like a hole big enough for Voldemort and his army to march right through to me. And an army of Dementors would be formidable. There are hundreds of them perhaps Thousands. There were hundreds on the Qudditich pitch during Harry's game in PoA. hundreds baring down on Harry , Hermione and Sirius at the end of PoA. And that doesn't include the Dementors that were still at Azkaban prison. Lord Voldemort could have an army of a thousand plus Dementors, the Giant population, potentially the Goblins and goodness know what other Dark creatures. A very scary thought. Mandy From sylviablundell at aol.com Mon Nov 17 16:54:18 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:54:18 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85229 Conan Doyle became resigned to being slapped in the street by furious women when he tried to kill off Sherlock Holmes. Slapping is the least JKR can expect if she kills of Harry. Sylvia (who doesn't think for a minute it will happen) From doliesl at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 17:01:52 2003 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 17:01:52 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: <001001c3ad26$e39cc350$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85230 Joj wrote: > I commented this morning about Percy being in Gryffindor and not > Slytherin. What I was saying was that so far, all we have seen > is Percy's Slytherin quality (ambition), but we haven't seen his > Gryffindor bravery yet. He is in Gryffindor, so it should follow > that he's at least somewhat brave. Even Neville has shown more > bravery. I think Percy is undercover myself. Percy display bravery by standing up against his own family and Dumbledore for what he truely believes in (that Fudge is right, climbing the political ladder is the right way to improve life for the better). What he did is not different from Sirius's running away from his family for his disagreement with their beliefs. That takes courage, and very Gryffindor of Percy. If he didn't have such courage, he could have been whining and complaining day and night but still sitting at home, never did anything about it, because he would have never dare to leave the comfort zone. Instead, he chose the extreme path: break off his ties with the family who sheltered him all his life and thrown himself alone in the world against, because of ideals differences. My point is: A courgeous person can still make a very bad decision based on his Gryffindor qualities. Bravery can be used in a wrong cause. -D. From dmoorehpnc at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 16:02:06 2003 From: dmoorehpnc at yahoo.com (derek moore) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 08:02:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Incursions into Privet Drive In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031117160206.16711.qmail@web20514.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85231 Jen Reese wrote: Thinking again about the protection offered at Privet Drive, and whether Harry is really safe there now. Has the protection reached critical mass at this point, and the risks are beginning to outweigh the benefits? Obviously when Voldemort was Vapormort, and the most loyal DE's were incarcerated at Azkaban, the protection held up very nicely. But now?. I'm new to HPFG, so for give me if I'm out of bounds. This is just a thought, Harry being at Privet Drive (inside the house to be precise) may be on the same order of the charm Dumbbledore placed on the Sorcerer's Stone (only someone wanting the stone but not wanting to use it). That is to say that only someone seeking harry but not wishing to harm him can come into the house. Derek Yahoo! Groups SponsorADVERTISEMENT ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From adollarandfiftycent at hotmail.com Mon Nov 17 16:51:32 2003 From: adollarandfiftycent at hotmail.com (adollarandfiftycent) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:51:32 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85232 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > On several different threads I've seen comments about how someone > couldn't be evil because they were in Gryffindor, or that person > *is* evil so they must have been in Slytherin. > > Why does the Sorting Hat decision at age 11 mean you will have those > characteristics your entire life? Personally, I'd like to find out > MWPP were in Slytherin or someone from Gryffindor is a betrayer. > Meaning all the houses have postitive and negative characteristics, > and that being in a certain house doesn't predetermine your entire > existence. I haven't read my books for a while now but I thought that we know that James and his friends were all in Gryffindor. And Snape was Slytherin. Isn't that right? If that is right then that means that Wormtail was a death eater and so not all of the Gryffindor's are good. And Snape is good so that's another thing that makes it so that being in one house doesn't mean that you will stay the way that house is. > It is canon that there were a group of Slytherins in the MWPP era > who all became DE's, but that seems to be the extent of > generalizations we can make about a group of students in one house > (correct me if I'm wrong). That is what I thought. This is my first post by the way. Fifty From IrishMastermind at hotmail.com Mon Nov 17 17:15:59 2003 From: IrishMastermind at hotmail.com (Anne Geldermann) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 12:15:59 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What if Harry dies? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85233 > >Carol wrote: > > > Hardly anyone would buy the books once the word got out, so I > > > don't think her publisher would allow her to do it. And she cried > > > when she killed off Sirius, who barely qualifies as a major > > > character, and she's made it fairly clear that she won't kill off > > > Hagrid or Ron, so she probably feels even more strongly about killing > > > Harry. > Madeline: >I think she might kill Harry, since we know she doesn't want to write >book 8. If she kills him by having him fall through a veil, it >wouldn't' be so bad. > I don't know if having him fall through a veil would work particularly well. Either he would not finish whatever battle he was in, or he and his adversary (presumably Voldemort) would die simultaneously. Since it's Harry's POV, it would be very hard to satisfactorily work this angle to a clear ending. Or he could just walk through the veil, but I don't see Harry committing suicide after he wins. Plus the veil's been used as a device to kill off a character already. I think he may very well die from wounds sustained in The Final Battle, and fading from his friends to seeing his parents and Sirius and anyone else who bites it in the next two books. > > > > Carol: > > I work in publishing and the publishers I know of are interested in > > making money. If they think that killing off a highly popular > > character will interfere with sales, they will reject the book as > > written. Yes, she can go to another publisher, but money counts with > > all of them--or at least with all the ones I work with. Rowling may be > > a special case, but I'm willing to bet that her current publishers > > have been given her word that she won't do anything that will cause a > > dropoff in readership. Publishers want books that sell. Period. > >Madeline: Yes, but by the time Harry dies, the readers will be all grown up. >They won't mind, so it won't kill off sales. > > While I agree that JKR won't worry too much about the publishers, I guarantee that there will still be kids reading these. Those that are a bit too young now will be able to read them by the time the seventh comes out. More readers pick these up with every book that comes out. I don't think the fandom will stop growing by any means. >Then Carol said: > > > > P.S. I accidentally snipped the part about Hagrid. I read in an > > interview, which I naturally can't find at the moment, that JKR had > >no intention of killing him off. I didn't invent the idea, you can be > >sure. > Madeline: >JKR said something about this a few years back, but I don't remember >much about it. I thought she said it was more likely that she would >kill him, though. > I don't see Hagrid dying, at least not in Book 6. He's far too useful as a plot device. The trio gets oodles of information out of him, instead of JKR having to come up with new ways for them to figure out what's going on. I also consider him a bit of a bridge between the world of the adult faculty and the world of the students. Granted, Dumbledore et. al. will probably keep Harry more in the loop now, but Hagrid is still important in this regard. Besides, Hagrid provides a bit of comic relief. The books are certainly going to get darker, especially with Fred and George now gone. But I'd like to think JKR lets us smile at least once or twice in 6 and 7. Anne _________________________________________________________________ Compare high-speed Internet plans, starting at $26.95. https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.) From erinellii at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 17:38:03 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 17:38:03 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85234 > Carol: > I work in publishing and the publishers I know of are interested in > making money. Rowling may be a special case, but I'm willing to bet that her current publishers have been given her word that she won't do anything that will cause a dropoff in readership. Publishers want books that sell. Period. Erin: Well, Jen Reese in message 85222 quoted the exact same interview I was going to, and I can't add much to it. I can say that I believe if Bloomsbury or Scholastic tried to stifle JKR's artistic vision, the stink she could make about their censorship would greatly outweigh in negative publicity any projected loss of profit from Harry's death. Carol: The millions of children you mentioned in the snipped portion of this message are not going to want Harry to die, and if they find out that he does, they won't want to read the books. I think the children who idolize her now will feel betrayed and many will reject both her and her books. You are, of course, entitled to the opposite opinion. Erin: I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I worked in a bookstore up until a couple months ago, and the outpouring of enthusiasm I witnessed for HP has convinced me that people will buy it no matter how it ends. They'll buy it just to complete their set of seven books if it comes down to that. Carol: And believe me, I do know how big this thing is. It's caught me, hasn't it? Erin: Sorry if I overdid the millions thing. It just so shocked me that anyone would even consider that HP had only sold in the *thousands*. Which was also why I thought you might not realize how big it was. Just because it caught you is no guarantee you appreciate its size, I mean, you've just told me you have a PhD in English and work for a publishing company. You've probably been caught by many books most people have never heard of. > Carol: > Sirius, though he's the title character in PoA, was deliberately > misrepresented throughout that book and appeared in his proper person only very near the end. He was a distant face and voice in GoF and was present in OoP only in the Grimmauld Place chapters and in the DoM battle in which he was killed. Erin: Well, I see this is something else we're never going to agree on. To me, a character doesn't necessarily need a lot of screen time to be a main character. The idea of Sirius hangs over books 3-5, Harry thinks of him frequently, he is a major player in Harry's emotions, and that is enough for me. Carol: > I have a PhD in English, so I know a bit about tragedy, and of course I don't consider Shakespeare to be a substandard author. The Harry Potter series is not a tragedy in either its structure or its subject matter. If we're looking at genres, I would classify it as part fantasy novel, part epic, and part bildungsroman. Erin: Do you count bildungsroman (a novel that shows the protagonist growing up, for those of you who don't know) as a genre? Genre, to me, is pretty much a marketing term, and I don't recall seeing that section the last time I went to the bookstore. I would say that fantasy and epics are the most likely places to find tragedy, which I would classify as a style rather than a genre. I won't deny that many authors do write so that you can neatly slot their books into a particular genre, but I don't think JKR is one of those. The dictionary's definition of a tragedy is that it is any literary composition with a somber theme, carried to a tragic conclusion. I would say that thus far, Harry is dealing with some somber themes. If he dies, boom, there's your tragic conclusion. Carol: I accidentally snipped the part about Hagrid. I read in an > interview, which I naturally can't find at the moment, that JKR had no intention of killing him off. I didn't invent the idea, you can be sure. Erin: I found this interview question, possibly it is the one you saw. ********************************** Hi, I have a question about Hagrid. JKR: Oh, Cool. I like Hagrid. Ask away. Is he going to be in the rest of the books? JKR: Yes. He's my favorite character. JKR: Oh, is he your favorite character? I like you because he's one of my favorite characters. Yeah, if you take away Harry and Hermione and Ron, then I love Hagrid the best definitely. He is going to be around. You are going to keep seeing him. I suspect that the reason you are asking this is because there is a rumor going around that people are going to die in the upcoming books. People are going to die and I'm not going to tell you who is and who isn't because--- that's for very obvious reasons. ********************************** Well, ok, so I conclude that you were right about Hagrid as well. I'll take him off my "to die" list for book 6. Not gonna rule out the possibility that he could die at the end of book seven, though. Carol: "Romeo and Juliet" is not a valid comparison because it's a play intended for an adult audience, not the last in a series of children's books with a secondary audience of adults. Theater goers didn't wait ten years (or whatever) to find out what happened to Romeo and Juliet. They knew at the outset that R and J was a romantic tragedy. Erin: Well, if you won't take that comparison, how about this one. I snipped it from the same interview I just quoted. This is the interviewer talking: ********************* Right, at the top of the New York Best Sellers List, the adventures of Harry Potter, and this is just the first 3 of 7. I'm not sure if there is anything like this since the high watermark of the late, great Charles Dickens. The legend was that when his serialized publication of "The Old Curiosity Shop" was coming to America, the books would come into the New York Harbor and people would be lined up on the docks yelling to people on board "Is Little Nell still alive?" People feel this same way about Harry Potter. ********************** I don't think people would have stopped buying Dickens if Little Nell had died (Did she? Lol, you can tell I don't have a PhD in English. I think they would have read on to find out *how* it happened and *why*, and I think they'd do the same for Harry if he snuffed it. > > Erin responded: > > There are so many things wrong with these statements I hardly even know where to start :-) > Carol: > I believe you mean that you disagree with me. That's rather different from saying that my statements are "wrong." Let me try to put my opinions in perspective here despite being rather unhappy with the general tone of your responses. > It's late and I'm tired so I hope I have answered this post > articulately and politely, if not to Erin's complete satisfaction. I > almost left it unanswered. Erin Ah, heck, Carol, I'm sorry if I gave you the impression that I was being snippy. I went back and reread my post and it does kind of read that way. I meant the smiley face icon to show that the "wrong" was humorous, but I guess I haven't quite mastered its use. My apologies. Although I would add (just because I love to debate) that if me disagreeing with you is pretty much the same thing as me saying that you're wrong. Not the same thing as you actually being wrong, as you pointed out. What I should have done was add an "IMO" after the word "wrong". I hope you will accept my apology. Erin (who doesn't *want* Harry to die, or even think it all that likely, but who refuses to think it impossible) From sylviablundell at aol.com Mon Nov 17 17:44:34 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 17:44:34 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85235 Madeleine wrote: >By the time Harry dies, the readers will be all grown up. They wont mind, so it wont kill off sales. This begs two questions. It assumes that grown-ups wont mind if Harry dies. I consider myself grownup, as much as I am ever likely to be, and I would mind very much. Secondly, new readers are coming to the Harry Potter books every day, many of them very young. There are always going to be children coming new to the books. I agree that JKR wont allow herself to be dictated to, quite rightly, but I also think when push comes to shove, she owes more to the children who read her books than to the adults. Sylvia From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Nov 17 18:02:12 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 18:02:12 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85236 First Joj wrote: > > > I commented this morning about Percy being in Gryffindor and not > > Slytherin. What I was saying was that so far, all we have seen > > is Percy's Slytherin quality (ambition), but we haven't seen his > > Gryffindor bravery yet. He is in Gryffindor, so it should follow > > that he's at least somewhat brave. Jen: Joj, I wasn't targeting your comment--your post was the catalyst for mine because you *did* make a distinction between the characteristics of the houses rather than a generalization about the houses themselves. It made me think about how infrequently that distinction is made. doliesl: > Percy display bravery by standing up against his own family and > Dumbledore for what he truely believes in (that Fudge is right, > climbing the political ladder is the right way to improve life for > the better). What he did is not different from Sirius's running away > from his family for his disagreement with their beliefs. That takes > courage, and very Gryffindor of Percy. My point is: A courgeous person can still make a very bad decision > based on his Gryffindor qualities. Bravery can be used in a wrong > cause. Jen R.: This is an extremely good point. I've been on several Percy threads recently and don't recall reading about his family defection from this POV. Percy left his good Gryffindor family, i.e. 'he's bad', whereas Sirius is seen as noble and courageous for turning his back on his evil Slytherin family. Of course, you could argue the Weasleys don't hold the extreme views the Blacks did, so Percy's choice to leave doesn't hold the same weight or courage. In some ways though, Sirius's choice was an easier one to make--the dark part of his family was *so* dark, whereas with Percy, how could he turn his back on loving parents with a noble mission? I'm not totally convinved Percy isn't spying for DD, and has to play along with the subterfuge for that reason. But your idea that bravery can be used to make wrong decisions would fit in better with JKR's Choice Theory (and is also supported by Harry's brave, yet mistaken, decision to go help Sirius). This idea also fits in with the shades-of-gray theme regarding ethical decision-making in OOTP-- no character can be seen as purely good or purely evil anymore (except LV, and I'm not 100% sure there won't be more to his story). From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Mon Nov 17 18:16:19 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 13:16:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life References: Message-ID: <000d01c3ad36$e646e170$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85237 ----- Original Message ----- From: doliesl Percy display bravery by standing up against his own family and Dumbledore for what he truely believes in (that Fudge is right, climbing the political ladder is the right way to improve life for the better). What he did is not different from Sirius's running away from his family for his disagreement with their beliefs. That takes courage, and very Gryffindor of Percy. If he didn't have such courage, he could have been whining and complaining day and night but still sitting at home, never did anything about it, because he would have never dare to leave the comfort zone. Instead, he chose the extreme path: break off his ties with the family who sheltered him all his life and thrown himself alone in the world against, because of ideals differences. My point is: A courgeous person can still make a very bad decision based on his Gryffindor qualities. Bravery can be used in a wrong cause. Joj: I don't think the way Percy has gone about this quest to stand up for what he believes in has been exactly brave. He got in one terrible fight with his Dad, said some hurtful things, and then cut ties with his entire family. He did send that one letter to Ron congratulating him on becoming a prefect, but it was very patronizing. He should know his brother well enough to know that that letter would be unwelcome. I don't see how sending back a Christmas sweater your mom knitted you and crushing her feelings is brave. I see his actions as cowardly, unless, of course, it's all a show, which I think it is. Spy!Percy [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From suzchiles at msn.com Mon Nov 17 18:34:33 2003 From: suzchiles at msn.com (Suzanne Chiles) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 10:34:33 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85238 Jen said: > I'm not totally convinved Percy isn't spying for DD, and has to play > along with the subterfuge for that reason. But your idea that > bravery can be used to make wrong decisions would fit in better with > JKR's Choice Theory (and is also supported by Harry's brave, yet > mistaken, decision to go help Sirius). This idea also fits in with > the shades-of-gray theme regarding ethical decision-making in OOTP-- > no character can be seen as purely good or purely evil anymore > (except LV, and I'm not 100% sure there won't be more to his story). I can't seem to make up my mind about Percy. But I did get a bit of insight from watching the "Cambridge Spies" series the last few weeks on BBC America. In this series, the four spies were quite visible concerning their anti-Facist, pro-Communist leanings while at Cambridge. Upon leaving Cambridge (and becoming spies for the Soviet Union), the four men decided that they must present themselves as right-wing as possible, even to the point of expressing support for Hitler. Amazingly, they were able to convince the higher-ups in British government that they really held those views and had renounced their anti-Facist, communist views as some kind of school-boy flirtation. Based on their "new beliefs," they were made privy to many secrets leading up to and during WWII, which they were able to pass on to the Soviets. This kind of reasoning may indeed support Percy's actions in OoTP. Like the Cambridge spies, Percy is acting the 110% Fudge supporter, almost more than Fudge himself. Like the Cambridge spies, he shows not one iota of doubt about his "new" viewpoint, even to the point of turning his back on his family. I can imagine that if it were a "real" conversion to to Fudgedom, he would have at least been kind to his mother regarding her Christmas present. Suzanne From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 17 18:38:57 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 18:38:57 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Leadership (was: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge) In-Reply-To: <005301c3ad1a$45ae1f60$2ac53841@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85239 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Iggy McSnurd" wrote: > Pippin: > > Since Neville has to deal with Snape far more often than he hasto deal with boggarts, it's a net loss, IMO. > > > Iggy here: > > It's interesting to note, though, that Neville can actually help himself out if he ever realizes that he can deal with Snape much like he dealt with the boggart. (Not in pointing his wand and shouting "riddikulus", of course.) > > Much like intimidation of public speaking, he can alleviate the fear Snapecauses in him by picturing Snape in his Gran's clothes. This will cause himto see Snape in a much less intimidating manner and will relax him a lot more.<< True. I've always found it curious that Lupin apparently never took Neville aside and suggested this. Of course it's possible that he tried and Neville didn't get it. Pippin From doliesl at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 18:56:22 2003 From: doliesl at yahoo.com (doliesl) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 18:56:22 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: <000d01c3ad36$e646e170$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85240 > Joj: > > I don't think the way Percy has gone about this quest to stand up for what he believes in has been exactly brave. He got in one terrible fight with his Dad, said some hurtful things, and then cut ties with his entire family. He did send that one letter to Ron congratulating him on becoming a prefect, but it was very patronizing. He should know his brother well enough to know that that letter would be unwelcome. I don't see how sending back a Christmas sweater your mom knitted you and crushing her feelings is brave. I see his actions as cowardly, unless, of course, it's all a show, which I think it is. Spy!Percy The fight with Arthur is merely a catalyst that trigger Percy's decision over a long period struggling between family bond and conflicting beliefs. His decision is not a sudden overnight act of denial nor escape. His disapprovement of Arthur's career choice has been cooking up inside him all these years. When he failed to convince his family nor getting their support, he made the decision to ran out on his own. If it takes great courage to stand up against your friends, but a even greater courage to stand up against your family. If he were a coward, he would not have send Ron the letter at all (he would rather avoid anything too do with his family of all cause). His letter to Ron shows he truely believe what he's doing is right, and not afraid/ashame to approach family members he has broken ties with. He's truely proud of his beliefs and decision. Being brave is having the courage and confidence to face all kinds of accusation, moral dilemma, danger and pain when standing up for your cause. That is not my idea of a cowardly act at all. It sure is a blind and dangerous kind of courage, but also very Gryffindor. It echoed Harry's brave but bad decision of going to MoM. Now Percy realized his mistakes, it'll take even greater courage for him to admit his errors and apologize/return to his family, and we'll see if that happens in upcoming books. D. who thinks Spy!Percy theory is a weak attempt to save the how ever-so- good Gryffindor's reputation that only re-enforce the black and white values, that go against JKR's themes in the books. From oppen at mycns.net Mon Nov 17 19:18:40 2003 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 13:18:40 -0600 Subject: Percy's letter Message-ID: <00b601c3ad3f$a49e79a0$e0570043@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 85242 There's been some discussion recently of Percy and his breach with his family in OotP...and I thought of an interesting parallelism. At one point in _Phoenix,_ Harry writes a letter to Sirius, but knows that it may well be intercepted and read by people who do not, to put it mildly, mean him or Sirius well. So he writes a letter that, if it's intercepted, will seem innocuous, but will be instantly understood by its intended recipient. Could Percy have been doing something of the sort with his letter to Ron? If his superiors at the MoM were looking over his shoulder, or he knew theymight well intercept the letter and read it (do they have censorship of that sort? I wouldn't put it past Fudge or Umbridge, and Percy knew that Umbridge was clambering into the saddle at Hogwarts, where the letter was going to go) he would have been in a pickle...how to warn Ron that trouble's brewing, without jeopardizing his position at the MoM? His mistake, if this was what he was trying to do, was to over-estimate Ron's perceptiveness. Ron, being Ron, just read the surface message. Maybe if he had written Hermione, instead...but Hermione might not have twigged, either. --Eric, originator of PUNIC FAITH (Percy, Undercover Near Idiotic Cornelius Fudge, Accessing Information That's Helpful) From rredordead at aol.com Mon Nov 17 20:03:44 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:03:44 -0000 Subject: Percey Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85243 I'm replying to my own post in complete embarrassment as it occurred to me today that Percy doesn't not in fact work for the Minister of Magic but the head of the department of International Magical Cooperation; Barty Crouch Sr. Or at least he did until Crouch died. But even though I made this huge error which weakens my theory considerably I do still stand the idea that Percy is under the Imperius Curse. It would still behoove Voldemort, or even just Lucius himself, to have a source at the ministry. Even if that source is working for a man who is himself under the Imperius. Crouch was away from his job an awful lot struggling to fight the curse and gave Percy free reign of his office, which must have included a lot of personal and confidential Ministry information. I'm sure Percy has access to many areas's of the Ministry even Lucius Malfoy can't get to, at least not legitimately anyway. So apologies for waiting your time and I after I scrape the egg of my face I promise to research more thoroughly in the future. Mandy. From manawydan at ntlworld.com Mon Nov 17 20:13:17 2003 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:13:17 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Percy Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? References: <1069090575.18734.74201.m10@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <004f01c3ad47$405680c0$034e6751@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 85244 Joj wrote: > I think that makes more sense than evil!Percy. I can but Percy having a spat over differences of opinion about the >MoM, but Percy's behavior far exceeds his job ambitiousness he'd shown previously. It's one thing to not send any >presents to his family for Christmas, but quite another to send the gift he received back. A slap in the face, if you would. I >think his behavior towards Harry is strange also. He acts as though Harry is a stranger, not a friend, which I think he >was. > > I know Percy was ambitious, but lets not forget, he was in Gryffindor, not Slytherin. That means he must have bravery in >him, right? So he's either under the imperious curse, or he's a spy? Right? (shrug) Well, maybe, but then again, maybe not. At the end of the day, JKR alone knows all :-) We tend on this list to go either for very straightforward Percy theories - Percy is just a Bad Person, or very Machinavellian ones - Percy is under Imperius from Malfoy/Fudge/Umbridge/Scabbers the rat (or alternatively, Percy is a deep mole for the Order). There's an alternative. It means looking at Percy as a whole person and not pinning labels on him, but I think that the way Percy has behaved is entirely explicable without needing to resort to magical explanations. So here we go. 1. Young Percy Percy is the third Weasley son - two older brothers, who are shown to us as being both mature and cool, three younger brothers, who (especially the twins, who are nearest in age to Percy) act in a young way. Percy doesn't act in a "young" way at all. He clearly sees himself as being the third of the "grown up" brothers, he tries very hard to be like Bill and Charlie. He doesn't succeed, of course. He's pompous, uptight, big headed, closed in, all the descriptives that are applied to him in the early books. And the joke is that he doesn't recognise any of that. He's ambitious, he wants to become Minister. Not someone with many redeeming personal features, apart from his relationship with Penny Clearwater and his obvious brotherly love for his two youngest sibs, Ron and Ginny. But he's very bright, he does very well academically, he becomes Head Boy. And, at the end of PoA, off he goes to being his climb up the greasy pole to be one of the Prefects who Gain Power. 2. Ministry Percy Percy starts his career as a Junior Assistant. That sounds like the most junior kind of post you can get in the MoM, with the possible exception of the doorkeeper. It's interesting to speculate that entry into the MoM requires a Hogwarts qualification, but that if the vast majority of the WW population aren't educated at Hogwarts, the wizarding bureaucracy is drawn from a very small section of society, who have shared cultural values and in many cases know each other personally. I'll leave it to others to speculate about what that means in terms of the Ministry's rule over other wizards. Also whether the inter House rivalry at Hogwarts is in any way carried over into the Ministry, whether a Head of Department from one House would favour fellow Griffindors, Slytherins, etc when it came to promotion and the like. Now back to Percy. Percy is Assistant to Barty Crouch. We know Barty's story, the personal tragedies that have blighted his life, the ruthlessness and inhumanity with which he carried on the struggle against Voldemort, the fact that he was passed over for the Minister's job, and we get a picture of a cold, bitter man, a perfect bureaucrat, facing the end of his career with no prospect of going anywhere. He doesn't treat Percy well, can't even remember his name. But Percy sees in Barty the ideal bureaucrat, and tries to be the best he can be. If "Mr Crouch" is going to call him "Weatherby", then he's going to be the best Weatherby in the Ministry, and do the best reports on cauldron bottoms and the like. Then, suddenly, Barty doesn't come into work. Now anyone who's worked in a government office will know that there are very strict procedures that have to be followed if someone doesn't come into work. They must contact their superior (perhaps the Junior Minister in Barty's case), the details have to be passed to the pay office, and so on. Percy knows all of this, it will have been drummed into him right at the beginning of his job. So why isn't Barty following the rules? Percy now has two voices in his head: Voice one says: This isn't right. Mr Crouch should have told his boss that he wasn't coming in, and he should have told the personnel department Voice two says: This is Mr Crouch, what he does is the right thing. If he's doing it this way, there must be a good reason. Unfortunately for both Barty and Percy, voice 2 wins out. Percy follows the instructions that Barty sends in. It's interesting to speculate that this may have signed Barty's death warrant. Possibly, although Barty is unable to throw off the Imperius, he is at least trying to fight it in the only way he can, by doing something that's totally out of character and against the Rules. Maybe he hopes either that Percy will notice that something's wrong and bring it to the attention of the right people, or alternatively that the despised "Weatherby" will make such a bad job of things that, again, someone will notice that something's seriously wrong. But Percy is a man who is totally loyal and does what he's told. He's also a Weasley, he's very intelligent and capable, and even though he's only a few months into his career, he makes a sufficiently good fist of going Barty's job that no one notices that there's anything amiss. He does too good a job of it. Deep down, of course, he knows that something's wrong. Voice one won't shut up and when someone reminds him of it (as Ron does at one point), Percy gets very angry and defensive. 3. The Investigation Suddenly it all comes crashing down. Barty is murdered and dishonourably disposed of in Hagrid's vegetable patch. Now Percy is in _serious_ trouble. There is an investigation. We know from OoP how justice works in the WW. It's arbitrary and lacks many of the rules of natural justice that we take for granted in our world. Percy is facing a possible murder charge. He could well have been one of the conspirators. At the same time, he feels responsible. If he had done what he should have done, and what he _knew_ he should have done, his beloved Mr Crouch might not be dead. And he has to explain everything to the investigation. It's interesting to wonder who might have done the investigating - Dolores Umbridge perhaps? She's certainly high in the Minister's estimation at this point and would have been considered eminently suitable to investigate. Not a good time to be Percy. This _very young man_ is interrogated over and over again about why he didn't do what he knew he should have done. Maybe even with a Dementor standing at the back of the room behind him, just in case he tried to escape, or ready for a guilty verdict. Percy's very much on his own at this point. Penny's not on the scene any more as far as we know - she could be anywhere. Percy's family are far more concerned with the rebuilding of the Order. Just to add insult to injury, Bill and Charlie are back in the picture: the brothers that Percy tried to model himself on are able to witness his humiliation and what might be the end of his career before it starts. 4. Redemption But suddenly, out of the blue. it's all over. The Minister interviews Percy, who I'm sure goes in expecting to be hauled off to Azkaban for the rest of his natural, and instead he's all sympathy. Percy's punishment is to be transferred from his previous post to the Minister's office. The rest of the charges, perhaps, lie on the table (though of course they're still there if Percy isn't of good behaviour in future!) >From Fudge's point of view, it makes sense. Percy, as I've said before, is a very intelligent and competent young man who, against the odds, actually did a very good job when Barty wasn't there. Plus, to keep him in order, there's still the accessory to murder charge on his file which _could_ all be dragged up again. So Percy knows that he has to be very very humble and very very good and toe the party line very very carefully from now on. He's landed on his feet, against all the odds, but he's certainly not out of the woods yet: one more cockup like the last one and he's definitely on his way to Azkaban, but do the job well and he's very close to the centre of power. 5. Breaking with the family Percy goes home and tells his parents his good news. Their son isn't going to prison or going to have his soul sucked out. He's been offered a second chance. Do they celebrate with open arms? Do the younger ones chant "He got off! He got off!"? Well, no. Actually, Arthur accuses Percy of being a spy. Frankly, I'm not surprised at Percy blowing his top at that point. Are you? Arthur handles things very badly. He _could_ have found that his son was a valuable asset to the Order just by talking at tea break about how things are going in the Minister's office (plus a conduit back for disinformation about the Order). But that doesn't happen. Percy (and, I'm sure Arthur too) say unforgivable things to each other and Percy storms out. Why does the breach deepen? >From our perspective, the events in the books happen very close together: that's the way they're written. But the characters live their lives in real time. Percy goes to work every morning. The people he associates with are Fudge and his circle. He hears their views every day. He _has_ to keep his nose clean and not express any alternative views. in fact, he has to agree with Fudge, just to keep on side. He reads the Daily Prophet, which reinforces his (probably) feelings that Harry (who he doesn't know very well, he's just Ron's little friend from school who keeps harping on about some dead wizard who died when Percy was very young and he associates with a climate of fear from those days) is talking a load of rubbish. Also, I suspect that Arthur, with his fascination for Muggle things, is a bit of a figure of fun at least in Fudge's circle. This goes on daily. Percy starts to believe all of this stuff. Being a stiff necked individual, he's not going to be the one to make any gestures of reconciliation, and he even rebuffs the ones that Molly makes. He doesn't seem to have anyone to give him an alternative perspective on things, especially in Penny's absence (or, even worse, if Penny is still around and feels the same way that Fudge does). I see him spending his evenings alone in his little flat and only coming alive when he's in work, striving to be the best Percy that he can be for Fudge and brooding on his grudge against his parents. 6. Is there a way back? I don't know. It's possible that now that Percy knows that Harry was telling the truth, that the door will be open to a reconciliation. But it could go the other way. Someone suggested recently that Percy could end up like Barty, hostile to the Order or anyone other than the Ministry fighting against Voldemort. Conversely (and this is my theory) Percy will, before he's reconciled to his parents, be put in a position where their lives are in danger and only he can save them. He will, but I fear he will die doing it. Sorry for the long post! But as I've tried to make clear, Percy doesn't have to be under anyone's orders but his own to have ended up where he did. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From rredordead at aol.com Mon Nov 17 20:24:02 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:24:02 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85245 wrote: > On several different threads I've seen comments about how someone > couldn't be evil because they were in Gryffindor, or that person > *is* evil so they must have been in Slytherin. > > Why does the Sorting Hat decision at age 11 mean you will have those characteristics your entire life? Now Me: Yes, I always thought that just because every dark witch or wizard that went bad, was in Slytherin House, it doesn't necessarily mean that all those in Slytherin House are dark witches and wizards. Not everything is black and white. Which is something Harry is struggling to come to terms with. It is interesting though, how we all so want to believe this is true. We love to put everything in its place, and have a place for everything. `He's a dark and evil Slytherin'. `She's a brave and good Gryiffindor.' But life is not that simple. Harry is showing a huge amount of prejudice against Slytherins. It's based on his experience of them but that doesn't make it right. We all need understanding and compassion to truly judge people fairly. I too hope we find out that the MWPP were in Slytherin, or at least James was. And I also hope Harry has to over come his prejudice of the Slytherin by either being forced to work with one or more of them, or have a Slytherin save something Harry loves. Mandy, a diehard supporter of Slytherin House. From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 20:27:59 2003 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:27:59 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85246 wrote: > > Tonks: > > > > what if Harry were to die? > > > Carol: (mas y mas snippage> > Hardly anyone would buy the books once the word got out, I don't mean to take you to task because, doubtlessly, there must be some series/books where readership fell off because the / a main character died at the end, but I'm having a hard time coming up with any. And I'd buy it, of course. Maybe 2 copies to support literary courage. Indeed, it seems to me that many of the most enduring stories, and especially epics, have ended with either the death of the / a main character or, in the case of romantic entanglements, the two protags being separated. Now, I'm not talking about the "best" lit. (I read on another post that your PhD is in English. My fiction MFA is from Iowa. Now that we've sniffed each other's CVs, we can discuss Harry's fate.) I'm talking about the ones that most people have read and endure all out of proportion with their assumed lit value. LOTR Frodo gets on the elf ship to Valinor. (sorry about sp, haven't actually read those.) Lion, Witch, Wardrobe, etc. Aslan climbs on the alter. Sherlock Holmes Died (ACD wrote more anyway.) Tempest Prospero gives up his magic. The Heart of the Matter Main char. dies. (Suicide, done well.) Love and other Demons Main char. dies. Braveheart Wallace dies. All WS's tragedies Everybody dies. Romeo and Juliet Parted by death, see above. That awful Titanic movie see above. That awful Gladiator movie Main char. dies. Gone w the Wind He didn't give a damn; she thought about it tomorrow. The Glass Bead Game Main char. dies just as he begins to live his real life. Iliad Most die, Odysseus cursed to a sequel. Oedipus trilogy Oedipus, Antigone, and others die. Anything by Dostoevsky Everybody good dies. The Hours V Woolf dies. Life of Pi Several char. die. The tiger runs off. The New Testament Wouldn't want to spoil the end. Anyway, my main point here is that ephemeral, genre, trendy lit is all about the happy ending and the boy and the girl getting married. Enduring, interesting lit, many times, ends with death because it is a reflection of life, and that's how life ends. To paraphrase Margaret Atwood in *Good Bones and Simple Murders,* everybody dies, everybody dies, everybody dies. To paraphrase Nearly Headless Nick in OotP, he was neither here nor there in his feeble imitation of life, and that is only what cowards choose. As Dumbledore said in PS/SS (p297, AmPB), "[I]t really is like going to bed after a very, *very* long day. After all, to the well- organized mind, death is but the next great adventure." A lot was set up in Book 1 that is becoming apparent in the most recent book. Children's lit does not shy away from death the way adult feel-good lit does. Dumbledore's quote sounds like an excellent title for the last chapter of Book 7. > I don't > think her publisher would allow her to do it. LOL. Her publisher wouldn't *allow* her to do it? I guess she'd have to find an agent who could simultaneously stand upright and pronounce the words, "Let the bidding begin." > And she cried when she > killed off Sirius, who barely qualifies as a major character, and > she's made it fairly clear that she won't kill off Hagrid or Ron, so > she probably feels even more strongly about killing Harry. "There will > be more deaths," she said in an interview (I can hunt up the reference > if anyone wants it), She's also mentioned in interviews that you have to kill them anyway. > I personally would consider killing Harry a copout, on > the same level as "it was all a dream." Only an author who can't think > of a way to weave all the loose ends into the fabric of the story > kills off the protagonist and considers it a denouement. > Carol Nah. Suicide is a copout. Sacrifice is heroic and messianic. There many reasons why Harry shouldn't die, but he might. I don't think a mere publisher could stopper up death if it's coming Harry's way. TK -- Tigerpatronus From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 20:32:45 2003 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 12:32:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Percy Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: <004f01c3ad47$405680c0$034e6751@f3b7j4> Message-ID: <20031117203245.99055.qmail@web20009.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85247 --- manawydan wrote: > Joj wrote: <> I've heard this before (and you've certainly heard our theories many times). But for some of us, his behavior is *not* explicable. It doesn't make sense. You give many good insights. But to me, it doesn't add up to OOTP Percy. He went from three-dimensional to two. His storyline was not resolved and he neither apologized nor reacted defesively. And even if he did seriously believe all the things Fudge said, his behavior is still not consistent with GOF when he believed everything Crouch said. Rebecca ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From gromm at cards.lanck.net Mon Nov 17 20:38:46 2003 From: gromm at cards.lanck.net (Maria Gromova) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:38:46 +0300 Subject: [***SPAM***]: Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Endings - OT Side Note - Comedy vs Tragedy References: Message-ID: <010201c3ad4d$e7580be0$f741983e@rcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 85248 Berit wrote: > > Bboy_mn; are you implying I am an American? Not all "foreigners" > prefer dark endings and tragedy, as a European I love happy endings. > But my cultural taste is probably under heavy American influence > then :-) Still, I can't for my life see why the Harry Potter story > has to end in dull, boring "tragedy". Because it would be incredibly > disappointing if Harry, at the end of book 7, woke up in his bed in > Privet Drive, realizing he had only dreamt the whole story, or; as it > has been suggested; Harry is denied the magical world and all his > best friends to go back to live in the muggle world. Better let Harry > die a hero's death which would be a much more fitting end to the > tale. I'm not saying I WANT him to die, but I sure don't want him > back to the dull, grey muggle world... > > Berit > http://home.no.net/berjakob/snape.html Now Maria: Hear, hear! Honestly, why has one to be an American if one hopes for a happy ending? Why it has to be some tragedy!? I am a Russian, and I definitely don't think every good story has to have a tragic end. I dislike tragic ends, actually. What is wrong if I like Harry and don't want him to die!? I'll be depressed if the series ends like this, but the 'dream' option and the 'muggle' option are far more horrible. If any of them comes true, I quit the HP fandom, as then the author whom I like will turn out to be a cheating and inhuman person. But I trust her and know she is better than that. Firmly, Maria. From ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk Mon Nov 17 21:05:07 2003 From: ibotsjfvxfst at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?Ivan=20Vablatsky?=) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 08:05:07 +1100 (EST) Subject: [HPforGrownups]What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031117210507.12929.qmail@web25105.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85249 Harry will die. There's no doubt whatsoever in my mind. However his death will not be a sad, final death with lots of heartbreak and bereavement. His death will lead to a resurrection in an indestructible, immortal body of mind-boggling majesty and splendour. His death will give hope to millions that there's more to life than birth, food, sex, and death. It will give hope that life has a wonderful and glorious purpose, namely liberation from this vale of suffering and return as the prodigal son to the Father's House. How JK Rowling will put all this into words is impossible to say. Life in the Kingdom of Love is impossible to describe. It's multidimensional. We have nothing in our universe to compare it with. It's like trying to explain to two dimensional people in a film what the third dimension is like. They know only about height and width. Depth is a concept they could never understand. I think she will describe Harry's reunion with the Father in abstract terms of hope and love and light. Some of you may wonder how I can be so sure about all this. It's quite simple. All my life I have sought for the Path of Liberation. When you desire something deeply all your attention is focused on it and so you begin to see the patterns. The patterns of liberation can be seen in all the great Holy Scriptures, in fairy tales, in myths, and in much great literature, for example Shakespeare and Dante. And, as I have repeatedly said, in the Alchymical Wedding of Christian Rosencreutz. What I have learnt from the patterns is that the seeker for liberation dies as to his earthly, three dimensional self, to resurge as the butterfly does from the cocoon in a new life form with infinitely greater beauty and freedom of movement. Harry will pass through the archway. This is called the Gate of Saturn in the alchemical traditions. But having passed through, he will become a Bodhisattva. That is a Master of Compassion, a being so filled with love and compassion for his fellow human beings that he regards life with the Father as of secondary importance, and so returns to work for the liberation of others. I have the supreme confidence in JK Rowling that she will be able to write Harry's end in such a way, that although there will not be a dry eye left on earth, humanity will be left with Hope and Love of such magnitude that it will change the world. Hans http://personals.yahoo.com.au - Yahoo! Personals New people, new possibilities. FREE for a limited time. From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 21:36:47 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:36:47 -0000 Subject: Simultaneous Worldwide Publication? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85250 Currently there is a thread 'What if Harry dies?', and an aspect of this has been the speculation that if word got out of Harry's death in the last book, people would refuse to buy it, and the publishers would refuse to print it. Readers refuse to buy- I don't think that is true. We all know how every TV show we watch is going to end; we can even guess the end to a majority of movies. Beaver is always sorry for screwing up. Greg Brady has always learned his lesson. The cops alway catch the bad guy. And all comedic hi-jinx are resolved in the end. etc... etc... etc... We don't watch for the ending because we know it, we watch for the story. I think sales might be down, if book seven ends in Harry's death; down but not destroyed. Many people will simply want to fill out their seven book set. Many will hate that Harry dies but will be desperate to know how that event came about. Publishers refuse to publish- As I said above, this is a book that is guaranteed to sell, and the world is full of people who can't live without know how the story ends. Not just, does Harry live or die, but how is the whole story and all its many characters resolved. So, whether they like it or not, the publishers will publish. If nothing else, JKR being the richest woman in the UK, even richer than the Queen, could self-publish. Distribution Dilemma - We know all the secrecy that occurred during the release of the latest book. I wonder how JKR is going to handle the release of the seventh book? If she does an English version release before the foreign language releases, for a vast majority of the world, the 'secret' will be out long before their books are even printed. I wonder if she will insist on simultaneous release of all languages, or perhaps, all primary languages (English, French, German, Spanish, Italian, Modern Greek, Japanese, Chinese, ?others)? And what will the level of secrecy be on this last book? It will have to be on the order of magnitude of the governments top defense secrets; right up there with the governments knowledge of UFOs. Reader's Dilemma - If JKR self-publishes and/or the book is released simultaneously in all major languages, I can see that addinga year or possibly more to the publication time of the book. Book 7 could be 10 year away, I don't know if I can hold out for that long. The Secret - Unless there is a substantial drop in the general popularity of the HP books, the demand to know what happened is going to be hysterically overwhelming. I can't imagine how they are going to keep it a secret. It will have to be more closely guarded than the Crown Jewels, and unless I'm mistake, theive have actually stolen or come close to stealing some of the Crown Jewels. Seems like a nearly impossible taks. Just a few thoughts. bboy_mn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 20:50:49 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:50:49 -0000 Subject: Where is the other Lestrange? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85251 Allie wrote: > > We saw Bellatrix in OoP over and over, and we know all about her > > heavy-lidded eyes... but wasn't there a husband? At the end of > GoF, Voldemort says that they're in Azkaban ("the Lestranges"), and > we never hear that one of them has died. So where is he? And is he > > also completely insane? :) > > > > Allie > > > Erin wrote: > That would be Rodolphus Lestrange. Harry notices him on the tapestry > at Sirius's house. He broke out of Azkaban with the others. He was > present at the MoM battle and was arrested as a DE again. If he is > as crazy as Bellatrix, he's a lot quieter about it. There's also a third Lestrange, Rodolphus's brother Rabastan, who was arrested with them twelve years earlier, along with Barty Crouch, Jr., for performing the Cruciatus curse on the Longbottoms. Oddly, LV doesn't seem to mention him in the Death Eater scene in GoF (IIRC, there's a space large enough for two, not three, people where the Lestranges ought to be standing), but Rabastan also participated in the battle in the Department of Mysteries (OoP 788, American edition), so obviously he was also freed in the Azkaban breakout. So far he's been little more than a name, indistinguishable from his brother except for Rodolphus's marriage to Bellatrix, but I'm sure he'll play a role in Book 6 or 7. Maybe Rabastan is the baby-headed DE and Rodolphus will seek revenge against Harry because of him. Or maybe he'll emerge as an independent personality. It's impossible to say anything except that it's a safe bet he's in the book for a reason. BTW, I've noticed several pairs of brothers (not counting the Weasley twins, who are part of a larger set and in any case are virtually indistinguishable): Sirius and Regulus Black, Colin and Dennis Creavey, Rodolphus and Rabastan Lestrange. I think there's a motif or pattern here, but I have no idea what it is. Carol From dbonett at adelphia.net Mon Nov 17 21:15:37 2003 From: dbonett at adelphia.net (dtbonett) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:15:37 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85252 I will be surprised if Harry doesn't die, in book Seven. JKR has hinted at it so much (though I have no time to get the references). Plus, there is the big C. S. Lewis influence that Rowling admits to. Remember, everyone died at the end of the Narnia series. (Though it hardly seemed tragic since the story continued 'through' the door and we only heard that the characters were dead in a quiet kind of way. Did anyone notice, by the way, that Rowling's door that you can go through, but not around, is pulled straight out of C.S. Lewis?) These are supposed to be children's books and in my experience, children do not mind characters in books dying. Well-meaning adults want to censor it away, but children can deal with this just fine, if it makes sense in the book. Thus, all the cleaned-up versions of authors like Hans Christian Andersen and the Brothers Grimm who had plenty of bleak things in their books. The Little Mermaid, for instance, is supposed to die. And I know many people who say that the Little Match Girl was their favorite story as a child. Harry could well die (though I think he would kill Voldemort somehow in his death); in fact, I personally find it rather difficult to imagine what a surviving Harry would do. It would be somewhat anticlimatic to have him survive wouldn't it? Mirror of Erised From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 17 21:51:04 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 21:51:04 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory (longish) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85255 > Tonks wrote: > > > I do not deny the possibility of a distant relative. But still, if > Petunia is > > Harry's 'ONLY' relative... doesn't this make for something interesting? Geoff: Being one of those who feel that Mark Evans could have a link to Harry, I wanted to come back to this question and consider again the evidence we have and the theories which have been put forward. In my argument, I am working from the perspective that he /is/ a relative. First, let us consider Harry's arrival at Privet Drive. There are two things driving the action here; the need for baby Harry to be placed with someone and the question of relatives. In a UK situation, if a child is orphaned, normally the question of placement with nearest relatives ? brother, sister, aunt or uncle - would be investigated. If the matter was not resolved in this way, then more distant relatives would be looked at or placing in local authority care. Speaking from experience, some years ago, a boy in one of our church families was orphaned. There were several aunts and uncles who all seemed unwilling to take the lad. My wife and I took him in for three weeks until one of the families agreed to have him. Even them, it did not work out because they had a grown up daughter and had no experience of teenage boys and, after a couple of years, placed him in care where he remained until he was 18. Dumbledore appears to choose Vernon and Petunia for two reasons. "They're the only family he has now." (PS p.15 all quotes UK editions). But also the question of protection from Voldemort. "Why could some wizarding family not have taken you in? . My answer is that my priority was to keep you alive. You were in more danger that perhaps anyone but I realised." (OOTP 736). So Dumbledore approached Petunia. "' I delivered you to her sister, her only remaining relative.' `She doesn't love me,' said Harry at once. `She doesn't give a damn ?` `But she took you,' Dumbledore cut across him `She may have taken you grudgingly, furiously, unwillingly, bitterly, yet still she took you .'" (OOTP pp.736-737). This suggests a third reason. Going back to the night when James and Lily were killed, there was a conversation between Dumbledore and Minerva McGonagall. `I've written them a letter.' `A letter?' repeated Professor McGonagall faintly 'Really, Dumbledore, you think you can explain all this in a letter? There people will never understand him! He'll be famous ? a legend - .' `Exactly', said Dumbledore .. `It would be enough to turn any boy's head . Can't you see how much better off he'll be, growing up away from all that until he's ready to take it?'" (PS pp.15-16). Reading between the lines, I seem to sense that, at some point, possibly quite early, Dumbledore went to see Petunia personally to underline the importance of Harry's protection; this would also be borne out by the Howler which he sent to her early in OOTP. Does it appear that he had to go to her as the only surviving relative? Possibly the only one close enough to invoke the protection of family blood. I have mentioned on a couple of occasions that when my father died in 1994 and I went through his address book to notify people, I "discovered" a family relative about whom I knew nothing; the lady concerned was a first cousin of my father and the link led back to my great grandparents. It is fairly obvious that Dumbledore was very close to James and Lily Potter. "'Naturally,' said Professor McGonagall. `James Potter told Dumbledore that Black would die rather than tell where they were, that Black was planning to go into hiding himself and yet, Dumbledore remained worried. I remember him offering to be the Potter's Secret-Keeper himself.'" (POA p.153). This implies very close friendship. So Dumbledore would know from conversations with Lily that Petunia was her nearest relative. But would it follow that he knew there were /no/ other relatives? Would the matter of more distant relatives of Lily have surfaced in conversation with Dumbledore? Do we discuss distant and half- forgotten family members with close friends? Not often. Dumbledore is intelligent and knowledgeable but not omniscient. To be fair, he may not be aware of the existence of other family members. Let's consider a similar situation to the one I experienced personally. Petunia's comments imply that the Evans were a magical family. "'But for my mother and father, oh no, it was Lily this and Lily that, they were proud of having a witch in the family'" (PS p.44). If you go back to, say, Lily's great-grandparents and trace back down other arms on the family tree, there are probably members of the family who Lily may not have remembered or who were distant enough either genealogically or geographically to not register consciously with her; hence the possibility of Mark Evans being a distant relative. As for the Little Whinging connection, I have already suggested that Mark's parents might be two squibs or a Muggle plus a squib. For this reason, they, like Arabella Figg, would not register at the Ministry as being in the area. A further question is, when does a young wizard become known to the Ministry? Would Mark Evans not become known by the Ministry until he gets a Hogwarts letter? Was Harry only known to the Ministry because of his special circumstances? "'We have no record of any witch or wizard living in Little Whinging, other than Harry Potter,' said Madam Bones at once. `That situation has always been closely monitored, given given past events.'" (OOTP p.131). So why is the link not known? Again, from my own experience. My wife began to track her relatives some years ago. About four years ago, when we had been living in the West of England for five years, we discovered that she had a second cousin living 30 miles away ? an hour's drive ? about whom we knew nothing; probably because her parents had several siblings and cousins and tracking them was a long business. It has been suggested that Petunia is a squib. She has obviously wanted to live an "ordinary" life with Vernon and disassociate herself with the magical connections of her sister and family. So she may have known that there were other branches of the family with magical connections and decided not to try to keep in touch or find out who they were. Hence, the Evans family including Mark arrive in Little Whinging unknown to the Dursleys and also not known to Dumbledore. This is, like all the speculation on the group, hypothetical. It could be confirmed or totally stood on its head by the next two books but it presents my thoughts for the case that Mark is related to Harry and also living in the neighbourhood. Geoff From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Mon Nov 17 22:13:50 2003 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:13:50 -0000 Subject: Percy's letter In-Reply-To: <00b601c3ad3f$a49e79a0$e0570043@hppav> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85256 --- "Eric Oppen" wrote: > There's been some discussion recently of Percy > and his breach with his family in OotP...and I > thought of an interesting parallelism. > > At one point in _Phoenix,_ Harry writes a letter > to Sirius, but knows that it may well be inter- > cepted and read by people who do not, to put it > mildly, mean him or Sirius well. So he writes a > letter that, if it's intercepted, will seem > innocuous, but will be instantly understood by > its intended recipient. > > Could Percy have been doing something of the sort > with his letter to Ron? If his superiors at the > MoM were looking over his shoulder, or he knew > they might well intercept the letter and read it > (do they have censorship of that sort? I > wouldn't put it past Fudge or Umbridge, and Percy > knew that Umbridge was clambering into the saddle > at Hogwarts, where the letter was going to go) he > would have been in a pickle...how to warn Ron that > trouble's brewing, without jeopardizing his > position at the MoM? I couldn't tell if this post was a reply to silmariel's post #80213 (Yahoo! has it threaded as if it were) or just your own ideas. In either event, #80213 raises a similar hypothesis, that Percy's letter was phrased in such a way as to be "in character" if read by a Ministry spy, but to encourage Ron to keep doing much as he already was. Silmariel suggested that, rather than a coded message, Percy was using his knowledge of Ron to, essentially, provoke Ron into digging in his heels, while getting useful information to H/H. There was a discussion around that post, and I think there were a couple of similar threads around the same time that might be of interest if you haven't looked at them. From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Mon Nov 17 22:28:19 2003 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:28:19 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Whole Evans Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031117222819.75614.qmail@web25108.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85257 justcarol67 wrote: Oops! I made an error in my previous post and would like to use this one to replace it. Carol wrote: > I think Petunia is Harry's only *known* relative. Dumbledore isn't > lying or exaggerating: he's speaking the truth as he knows it. Udder Pendragon responded: > The words are: UK PB Page15 > > "I've come to bring Harry to his aunt and uncle. They're the only family he has left now." Carol: Well, yes, but this is only one of several references, some of which say "relative" rather than "family." And Petunia as his closest (blood) relative is more important than the Dursleys as "family." Interesting that "family" here includes Uncle Vernon, who is *not* a blood relation. Hm. UPD wrote: > This does not preclude Harry having other relatives. Carol: I agree. I've been arguing for some five posts now that Mark Evans is Harry's second cousin or something of the sort. UPD wrote: But if LP/PD's dad had a brother who was 15 or so years younger than him. Then Mark E could be Harrys First Cousin Carol: One small problem: In order for Mark and Harry to be first cousins, Mark's father would have to be their brother. If Mark's father is their father's brother (their uncle), Mark would be Lily and Petunia's first cousin and Harry's first cousin once removed. It's simpler all around if Mark's father is Lily and Petunia's slightly younger first cousin, which would make Mark and Harry second cousins. Carol U_P_D again Keeping in mind what JKR has said about not introducing new characters in the last two books. I think she would be very naughty to give Lilly and Petunia a brother at this stage. I would settle for first cousin once removed and how about his dad being married to a muggle born witch he met through Lilly. Udder Pendragon ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --------------------------------- Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 22:40:04 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:40:04 -0000 Subject: BRAVO! - Percy Weasley ... Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: <004f01c3ad47$405680c0$034e6751@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85258 Bboy_mn responding to Ffred's long post#85244: Bravo! Probably the best and most realistic analysis of what is happening to Percy that I have ever read. Percy is driven by his underlying psychology. In my opinion, as stated many times before, Percy is playing the dysfunctional family role of 'the Good Son', and he is desparate for some recognition of this role. But this is a dysfunctional role, consequently the more he tries to be recognised as 'the good son', the less recognition and the more harrasment (from Fred and Geoge) he gets. Percy could heartily take whatever Fred and George dish out, it they would first say to Percy, 'well done Percy'. But they don't, so he tries harder, and he sinks deeper into his dysfunctional role which only make it worse. In short, the more he does it Right (dysfunctionally right), the more it goes all Wrong. You ask, can there be redemption? I think there can and will. I sincerely hope (although I have my doubt) that someone in the family (Harry and Ron?) will go to Percy and compel him to come back. I have this vision of Harry and Ron going to Percy's flat, kicking down the door, walking into the kitchen, sitting down, and saying, 'well, are you going to make us some tea then?'. Then sitting there and talking to Percy until Percy realized that there is no escape; once a Weasley, always a Weasley. Percy is doomed in his fate as a member of this undignified and slightly eccentric family, and there is nothing he can do to escape it. So, he might as well resign himself to his fate, and to the most horrendous amount of teasing he has ever experience once Fred and George get a hold of him. Percy will be made to understand that you can be angry at someone you love and still love them. And just as easily, you can forgive someone you love, no matter how big an annoying prat they might be. Just a thought. bboy_mn * * * * * * * * * One of life's great tragedies is to have never found what you love in life. Lifes greatest tragedy is to have never looked for what you love. From john at sunstoneonline.com Mon Nov 17 23:15:42 2003 From: john at sunstoneonline.com (John Hatch) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:15:42 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Endings References: <1069063443.3844.27418.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000801c3ad60$b979aa90$0e00a8c0@sunstone77nev7> No: HPFGUIDX 85259 > I think that after Harry defeats Voldemort in the great final battle, the > Ministry of Magic will offer him many accolades and any position in the MoM > he might want. Harry will thank them politely, say no, and become a > professional Quidditch player. Next to defeating Voldemort, I can't think of > anything that would make Harry happier than that. >What about his own ambition to be an auror? I don't think dark >wizardry will just disappear when Voldemort and the Death Eaters are >defeated. Evil always exists in some form. Before Voldemort it was >Grindelwold. Maybe the next one will be Draco (who will have to become >a lot more formidable than he's appeared so far to be a worthy >adversary, I'll admit). Maybe it's a little too pat, but he did state >that as his ambition in his career counseling session with McGonagall. >It seems to be the goal he, Ron, and Hermione were working toward. And >if defeating Voldemort doesn't land him acceptance into auror >training, I don't know what will. John writes: I've always thought it's fairly obvious what Harry will do - be the Defense Against the Darks Arts teacher at Hogwarts. I'm not saying it's obvious to be snotty to other theories :) It just seems like JKR has set it up pretty well. No one else can do the job, how about Harry Potter? Besides, there's nothing that says Harry can't be a teacher and an auror. If trouble comes, someone can watch his class for a few days. John This message was checked by MailScan for WorkgroupMail. www.workgroupmail.com From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Mon Nov 17 23:17:32 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:17:32 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85260 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says My recollection is that the little mermaid doesn't die, because she doesn't have a soul. She just turns into foam on the sea. That has always creeped me out, and I was relieved to find out that "The Little Mermaid" is not a folk tale, but the product of a clinically depressed mind. Now *that's* bleak. I also think Harry's survival would be anticlimactic. I keep reading these threads looking for a crumb of hope that there's a way JKR can keep Harry alive without wussing out on her Master Plan (I've found a few, which I clutch to my bosom), but in the main, I'd rather just not think about it... --JDR From john at sunstoneonline.com Mon Nov 17 23:42:13 2003 From: john at sunstoneonline.com (John Hatch) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 16:42:13 -0700 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Digest Number 3979 References: <1069063443.3844.27418.m12@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <001f01c3ad64$6dad3ab0$0e00a8c0@sunstone77nev7> No: HPFGUIDX 85261 Erin wrote: > And "hardly anyone would buy the books once the word got out" of > Harry dying? Can you truly believe that? I mean, a tragic ending > never stopped Romeo and Juliet from being popular. And there's a > certain new movie out that's selling pretty well despite the hero's > death at the end. Star Wars is still going strong although we all > realize the main guy is about to become Darth Vader. I think Harry > Potter would sell even if she had all the characters bite it and > Voldemort win at last. If you don't, perhaps you don't realize just > how big this thing really is. Carol wrote: Yes, I truly believe that. The millions of children you mentioned in the snipped portion of this message are not going to want Harry to die, and if they find out that he does, they won't want to read the books. I'll read it because I want to find out what happens to Snape and certain other characters, but I think the children who idolize her now will feel betrayed and many will reject both her and her books. You are, of course, entitled to the opposite opinion. "Romeo and Juliet" is not a valid comparison because it's a play intended for an adult audience, not the last in a series of children's books with a secondary audience of adults. Theater goers didn't wait ten years (or whatever) to find out what happened to Romeo and Juliet. They knew at the outset that R and J was a romantic tragedy. And believe me, I do know how big this thing is. It's caught me, hasn't it? Now John responds: I probably wouldn't buy the book - and that comes from someone who's a big enough fan to join a Harry Potter email group :) I read Harry Potter for the fun of it. Period. If the books stop being fun, then I'll probably stop reading. And IMO, Harry dying definitely qualifies as not being fun. Sure, I'd stick around this group for a while and visit the Lexicon to find out what else happens in the book, but I wouldn't read it if I heard Harry dies. Granted, I'll be buying the book at 12:00 AM the day it's released. But if Harry dies, I'll be disappointed and I won't read the book again. Erin wrote: > Next- Sirius not a major character?? The guy had a whole *book* > named after him. Harry regarded him as a mixture of father and > brother. Probably only Ron or Hermione's death could have hurt him > more. How much more major do you want? Carol wrote: Sirius, though he's the title character in PoA, was deliberately misrepresented throughout that book and appeared in his proper person only very near the end. He was a distant face and voice in GoF and was present in OoP only in the Grimmauld Place chapters and in the DoM battle in which he was killed. He is not a major character to the same degree as Ron or Hermione or for that matter Snape, who has grown and developed through all the books as is as much a part of Hogwarts as Dumbledore. I do agree with your statement that only Ron's or Hermione's deaths would have hurt Harry more than Sirirus's. That does not make him a major character, however, and he is clearly expendable regardless of his popularity on this list and elsewhere. Now John writes: I couldn't agree more with Carol. Sirius was an important character to Harry, but he strikes me as hardly a major character. Just because he had a whole book named after him means little. How much of a role did the Goblet of Fire play in book 4? Sure, it got Harry into the tournament - then we never saw it again. That's why I was surprised the title was changed from "Doomspell Tournament" to "Goblet of Fire." You could also make the same argument about book 5 - The Order of the Phoenix. The book isn't about the Order of the Phoenix at all. Harry learns what the order is, sure. But once he's at Hogwarts, he has little to do with them. > Erin responded: > Actually, having the hero die is a classic... oh, I can't really > explain it properly, but you should definitely read Joseph > Campbell's "The Hero With A Thousand Faces" to get a better > understanding of why so many heros end up biting it. It has to do > with the whole heroic journey thing. I will limit myself to asking > if you consider Shakespeare to be a substandard author, since several > of his plays end as tragedies? John writes: Harry Potter hardly classifies as a Shakespearian tragedy. Having said that, there may be some evidence that Harry is slated to die in the series as he does fit Joseph Campbell's model in some respects. First, he's a loner. Oh sure, he's got Ron and Hermione and Hagrid. But from the looks of it, Ron and Hermione are doomed to fall in love in future books. Hagrid's a nice chum, but he's hardly a character Harry can connect with emotionally. The prophecy only serves to separate Harry from others even more. Everyone in Harry's life that has been a parental figure has been taken away from him. Those that are supposed to be surrogate parents fail miserably - the Dursley's. Harry appears to be born with a single purpose - to defeat Voldemort. Many characters that have a "destiny" end up dying - Anakin Skywalker and Neo (sorry for those who haven't seen the movie yet) are just a couple of recent examples. But I think there are other evidences that Harry will not die. He's a survivor - he's the boy who lived. He has a fairly positive outlook on life, and he enjoys life. Characters who sacrifice themselves often have a gloomy outlook, or have nothing to live for. While Harry has no one in particular to live for, he does enjoy life and has a much different attitude that typical characters who give up their lives. Regardless, I'll be extremely unhappy if Harry dies. Extremely. Just my two cents. John This message was checked by MailScan for WorkgroupMail. www.workgroupmail.com From sydenmill at msn.com Tue Nov 18 00:02:19 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 00:02:19 -0000 Subject: The Ending Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85262 We all are assuming a perfectly rational, logical, muggle ending to the Harry Potter series. Harry kills Voldemort or Voldemort kills Harry, tra la la la la. How about a magical ending? Maybe when Harry and Voldemort come to their ultiumate confrontation, something happens that causes them to cancel each other out (matter and anti-matter) and they meld into something that is "in essence UNdivided." We had Quirrellmort, why not a Harrytom or Riddlepotter where the essence of both Voldemort and Harry exist in one body (preferably Harry's. . .). Something unusual like that. Or, how about a Brigadoon-type ending where Hogwarts' enchanted grounds, the Forbidden Forest, Hogsmeade, and other magical locations are somehow cast into another dimension, leaving us all to wonder what is happening in the world we can no longer see? And, it is written that at some time in the future when Saturn and Mars line up with Orion, the spell will be broken and the magical world will once again exist as before. Of course, I am Muggle through and through. I want to see Harry kill Voldemort to where he isn't just merely dead but is most sincerely dead (thank you Munchkins) -- with Ron and Hermoine standing arm-in- arm, waving at Harry and Ginny riding off into the sunset to have those 12 children Trelawney threatened him with, er, predicted he would have during her fit of pique against Umbridge. What magical conclusions might there be to this story of Harry Potter? Bohcoo From nineve_laguna at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 00:05:34 2003 From: nineve_laguna at hotmail.com (nineve_laguna) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 00:05:34 -0000 Subject: Digest Number 3979 (Harry as tragedy) In-Reply-To: <001f01c3ad64$6dad3ab0$0e00a8c0@sunstone77nev7> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85263 John writes: (edited) > Harry Potter hardly classifies as a Shakespearian tragedy. Having said that,there may be some evidence that Harry is slated to die in the series as he does fit Joseph Campbell's model in some respects. > Harry appears to be born with a single purpose - to defeat Voldemort. Many characters that have a "destiny" end up dying - Anakin Skywalker and Neo(sorry for those who haven't seen the movie yet) are just a couple of recent examples. But I think there are other evidences that Harry will not die. He's a survivor - he's the boy who lived. He has a fairly positive outlook on life, and he enjoys life. Characters who sacrifice themselves often have a gloomy outlook, or have nothing to live for. > Regardless, I'll be extremely unhappy if Harry dies. Extremely. > > John *********** I agree with you, John, and I will add for all the others who are following this thread and contributed with so many diferent opinions, that if Harry dies, so does all hope for kids who try to be a true Gryfindor: brave, loyal and righteous. I think the whole point of Voldemort is that doesn't matter how powerfull you are, if you are not united you do not win (as DD says), and it is loyalty, courage and persistence that will defeat Voldi at the end. If Harry dies, Voldemort must die too. He cannot win. What kind of example for modern kids, with all terrorism and war and crime going around this days, would JKR set if Voldi is to win at the end? With all sufering and anxiety LV has caused to Harry and many others, it would not be fair if he triunphs at the end. It would just make millions of kids give up, turn to the Dark Side themselves, after all, if you fight so much for nothing, what is the point? What would be the point of the entire books, if Voldi was to win? The moral of the story for me? If Harry dies, it must be an ultimate sacrifice to save his beloved ones, something that will make me hold the book 7 tight to my chest and cry for at least 4 hours, but still admiring Harry for his righteous heart that stood always unblinkingly on the right side where so many would have bowed to Lord Voldemort. Nineve From lhuntley at fandm.edu Tue Nov 18 00:47:06 2003 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 19:47:06 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85264 Bohcoo > How about a magical ending? Maybe when Harry and Voldemort come to > their ultiumate confrontation, something happens that causes them to > cancel each other out (matter and anti-matter) and they meld into > something that is "in essence UNdivided." We had Quirrellmort, why > not a Harrytom or Riddlepotter where the essence of both Voldemort > and Harry exist in one body (preferably Harry's. . .). Something > unusual like that. > > What magical conclusions might there be to this story of Harry Potter? I don't know if you've read it, but the fanfic "Come Together" by Granger is written on a similar theme. That is, Harry "kills" Voldemort (except to paraphrase Hagrid, there wasn't enough human left in him to actually die), so instead Voldemort's essence is transfered into Harry, who then has to deal with the consequences. (Actually, so far "Come Together" has focused on a potential H/H romance from Hermione's POV, so I wouldn't recommend it if you don't go for that pairing. Otherwise, it's a great fic which portrays the Trio's friendship amazingly well and seems to have the potential to get an actual plot soon. Unfortunately, the author is now on a bit of a maternity leave.) As for the likelihood of this happening in canon, I don't give it much of a chance. Why? Well, I think that it's a brilliant plot device -- as well as nicely paralleled with existing canon (i.e., Voldemort transferring some of his powers to baby!Harry through AK). However, JKR has repeatedly stated that she does not intend to write any books after the seventh, thereby negating the possibility of a story arc that occurs *after* the climatic scene in which Voldemort is destroyed (which naturally occurs at the end of the seventh book). Whatever happens, it's got to have some closure to it. Even if it's a bad, unhappy sort of closure, I don't believe JKR is one of those writers who so enjoys being pretentious and obtuse that they intentionally leave their stories unfinished for the sake of "art." (The only story I can remember in which this tactic worked was, IMO, "The Lady in the Tiger," which took the form of a riddle, rather than the author basically saying "Neener, neener, neener. I am SO deeper than thou art.") Laura From abush at maine.rr.com Tue Nov 18 00:48:03 2003 From: abush at maine.rr.com (kyliemckenzie1225) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 00:48:03 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85265 <> now me (kylie): just as a note of interest RE: Voldemort's red eyes and Harry's green eyes, in GoF JKR writes, "A jet of green light issued from Voldemort's wand just as a jet of red light blasted from Harry's --- ..." She follows up saying that the jets of light hit each other and combined to turn a deep gold. Coincidence? Significance? we shall see.... kylie From Elvishooked at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 01:06:05 2003 From: Elvishooked at hotmail.com (Inge) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 01:06:05 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85266 Just to pick a few of the posts that I want to comment on: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" wrote: Conan Doyle became resigned to being slapped in the street by furious women when he tried to kill off Sherlock Holmes. Slapping is the least JKR can expect if she kills of Harry. Sylvia (who doesn't think for a minute it will happen) and in #85235 Sylvia continues: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85267 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dtbonett" wrote: Mirror of Erised: > I will be surprised if Harry doesn't die, in book Seven. JKR has > hinted at it so much (though I have no time to get the references). > Plus, there is the big C. S. Lewis influence that Rowling admits to. > Remember, everyone died at the end of the Narnia series. (Though it > hardly seemed tragic since the story continued 'through' the door and > we only heard that the characters were dead in a quiet kind of way. > Did anyone notice, by the way, that Rowling's door that you can go > through, but not around, is pulled straight out of C.S. Lewis?) > Geoff: Don't forget that the Narnia books are an allegory of Christianity. Someone remarked recently on Aslan's death on the altar. Remember that this was a representation for children of Christ's sacrifice on the Cross and, as with the Resurrection in the real wordl, Aslan returned to life. We all have to die. As I have said in the past, I see Harry as a "type" for the Christian's journey through life. We all have to die sometime. I would however, like to see Harry free of Voldemort and the burden he has been for the last few years and not becoming mundane or anything like that but being able to live a bit, do things he would like to do and not have to do, marry one or other of the ladies trying to catch his eye in the books and just be a relatively normal member of WW society, allowing for his fame..... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 17 20:57:25 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 20:57:25 -0000 Subject: Lupin and Leadership (was: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85268 > > I agree with Laura. If Lupin still dislikes Snape, he generally > keeps it to himself. He certainly doesn't reciprocate Snape's > intense loathing of him, which is less noticeable in OotP than > PoA. (The boggart scene may indicate a slight lingering dislike, > but I don't think Lupin planned it in advance; once Neville had > identified Snape as his greatest fear, Lupin was more or less > committed to making him look ridiculous. His motive seems to > have been to help Neville rather than to spite Snape.)< Pippin: > But it didn't help Neville, actually. > > "Snape didn't seem to find it funny. His eyes flashed menacingly > at the very mention of Lupin's name and he was bullying Neville > worse than ever." -PoA ch.8 > > Since Neville has to deal with Snape far more often than he has > to deal with boggarts, it's a net loss, IMO. Carol again: I'm not so sure. Look at Neville's performance in Dumbledore's Army. He can deal with a boggart and he's learning other DADA spells. I think we'll also see a difference in his attitude toward Snape in Book 6. (It would help, I suppose, if he knew that Snape was in the OoP, but it may be a while before he finds out.) Carol From pjcousins at btinternet.com Tue Nov 18 00:29:29 2003 From: pjcousins at btinternet.com (confusinglyso) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 00:29:29 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85269 OoP Chapter 'The Department of Mysteries' UK page 683 Harry and Luna hear voices from beyond the veil. "Someone's whispering behind there," he (Harry) said, moving out of her (Hermione) reach and continuing to frown at the veil. "Is that you, Ron?" "I'm here, mate," said Ron. If Harry hears a voice similar to Ron's, could it be the voice of the often speculated 'missing Weasley' ? A brother between Charlie + Bill --- gap --- and Percy. Remember in GoF at Wizard World Cup, Arthur Weasley explains to the youngsters the fear of coming home and finding the Dark Mark hovering over your house. Arthur may have been talking from personal experience. I am not as well read as many of you theorists on this excellent site, and my simple reading of 'the veil' does not come over as 'boundary with the dead', but I seem to be a minority of one, lol. If the voices are from the dead, could the 'missing Weasley' be there? Would the dead brother have been about Ron's age, to sound like him? For my (idiotic) theories if the voices are from the living, and living Weasleys to be exact, see my post number #83373 Phil From kate_bag at hotmail.com Mon Nov 17 22:38:20 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 22:38:20 -0000 Subject: Percey Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85270 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > I'm replying to my own post in complete embarrassment as it > occurred to me today that Percy doesn't not in fact work for the > Minister of Magic but the head of the department of International > Magical Cooperation; Barty Crouch Sr. Or at least he did until > Crouch died. > > But even though I made this huge error which weakens my theory > considerably I do still stand the idea that Percy is under the > Imperius Curse. It would still behoove Voldemort, or even just > Lucius himself, to have a source at the ministry. Even if that > source is working for a man who is himself under the Imperius. > Crouch was away from his job an awful lot struggling to fight the > curse and gave Percy free reign of his office, which must have > included a lot of personal and confidential Ministry information. > I'm sure Percy has access to many areas's of the Ministry even > Lucius Malfoy can't get to, at least not legitimately anyway. Would it not be more useful to Lucius and, by extension, Voldemort if Percy, under the Imperius Curse, gave information about strategies the good guys were using to combat Voldie et al? It seems strange to me that someone so close to Harry (as Percy undoubtably is) would be put under the Imperius Curse only to have him relay information about the Ministry when much more useful information could be gained from him, information about Harry himself. Any Ministry worker (and most likely a more important Ministry worker) could be put under the Imperius Curse to gain information from inside the MoM...there are very few people that are as close to Harry as Percy is (yes, I know Percy and Harry aren't best of friends, but the Weasleys are still a very important part of Harry's life, and thus Percy is as well). Just a thought. ~Kate From glpm93 at aol.com Mon Nov 17 23:04:35 2003 From: glpm93 at aol.com (G Miller) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:04:35 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85271 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tigerpatronus" wrote: snip > > Indeed, it seems to me that many of the most enduring stories, and > especially epics, have ended with either the death of the / a main > character or, in the case of romantic entanglements, the two protags > being separated. Now, I'm not talking about the "best" lit...... Now that we've sniffed each other's CVs, we can discuss Harry's > fate.) I'm talking about the ones that most people have read and > endure all out of proportion with their assumed lit value. > snip > > Anyway, my main point here is that ephemeral, genre, trendy lit is > all about the happy ending and the boy and the girl getting married. > Enduring, interesting lit, many times, ends with death because it is > a reflection of life, and that's how life ends. > snip > > As Dumbledore said in PS/SS (p297, AmPB), "[I]t really is like going > to bed after a very, *very* long day. After all, to the well- > organized mind, death is but the next great adventure." A lot was set > up in Book 1 that is becoming apparent in the most recent book. > > Children's lit does not shy away from death the way adult feel-good > lit does. Dumbledore's quote sounds like an excellent title for the > last chapter of Book 7. > snip > There many reasons why Harry shouldn't die, but he might. snip > TK -- Tigerpatronus Good literary examples and I agree the "HP and the Next Great Adventure" would be an excellent title for book 7. (Although that would probably give away the ending) I think a good indicator if Harry will meet his demise at book 7 will be his (or the WW's) general state of well being at the end of book 6. JKR could be utilizing another literary technique that she has used to some extent already. That is, the set up for the opposite (or unexpected) to happen. (one example would be H's dreams of S in danger that turns out to be a trap and ends up with S being killed anyway, OK this might not be the best example, but I don't have my books handy) Let me try to explain it putting forth a few scenarios with examples added for effect: 1. Book 6 ends upbeat with V nearly defeated, most of the DEs7 gone, Fudge out of the MM (or a complete attitude adjustment), OoP intact, HRH happy and alive, and H with a new and serious love interest. End of book 7 Harry dies (probably by sacrificing himself in some noble way finishing off V). 2. Book 6 continues the gloomy tone of the previous two books and ends with the WW & H in dire straits. MM completely disabled, OoP ripped apart, multiple good characters (both major & minor) killed or severely wounded, good characters turn out to be working for V, etc. Book 7 will have a happy ending and Harry will live after defeating V in some heroic fashion. (a side note to this, if a minor OoP character is killed off early in book 6, I would expect a major character to die at the end) 3. Book 6 ends with the state of affairs unknown. Book 7 could go either way. My own personal feeling is that after the way the previous two books end, book 6 will be more optimistic and promising, which could spell doom for our young Mr. Potter. However, the only book 7 prediction I would be inclined to make is that H does something extremely heroic to kill V. TVTFTG (The very tired father of twin girls) From cuteziepie444 at aol.com Mon Nov 17 23:11:13 2003 From: cuteziepie444 at aol.com (Elise) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:11:13 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85272 Mandy said: > I too hope we find out that the MWPP were in Slytherin, or at least > James was. I've read a couple of posts saying that the MWPP should have been in Slytherin, etc., and while I do think that this is an interesting idea, I find it doubtful. In OoP Harry takes a trip into Snape's mind at the time of the MWPP school days. My point here is that he sees them in their school robes. I would think that if Harry saw his father and his friends wearing Slytherin robes, he would be quite upset/disappointed/confused/astounded, and we would probably know about it. It seems that if any of them were in Slytherin, it would be too much of an important plot line to leave out there. I'm not completely sure with this theory though, because there is always the chance that Harry didn't pay attention to detail and didn't notice the uniform colors (the uniforms might also have been different concerning the display of house colors) or JK just didn't feel it was necessary to let us know at that moment. I still think, however, that it is much more likely that the MWPP were in Gryffindor (or at least most of them) because of Harry's lack of shock. Thanks! (That was my first post on the list by the way...Hi everyone!) Elise From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 00:29:17 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 00:29:17 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85273 Abigail wrote: Whether or not Headship is an academic distinction, I find it hard to believe that it would be bestowed on a trouble-maker. If that were the case, why didn't Fred or George become Head Boy? They're both prodigiously talented wizards, as we can see from their ingenious methods of resistance at the end of OOP. Carol wrote: They're prodigiously talented but not academically inclined. Note that they drop out before they take their N.E.W.T.S. and receive only three O.W.L.S. apiece as compared with Percy's three, so they're not candidates for Head Boy even if it's an appointed position and not automatic, as I suspect it to be. Ffi responded: I'm sorry if I've missed this question being answered at some point, but there's one thing that confuses me. Back in PS, hagrid said harry's parents were head boy and girl in their time, but in OofP, sirius says James wasn't a prefect - so can non-prefects become head boy? It is usually a continuation - head b/g chosen from the 6 prefects in the last year of school. Ffi Carol again: This seeming inconsistency is the reason I think that the Head Boy and Head Girl are automatically assigned based on marks (grades) regardless of whether these people have previously been appointed as Prefects. My solution would also explain how the Head Boy and Head Girl could be from the same house (Gryffindor) in Lily and James's last year and how James could be Head Boy without having been a Prefect. Most Head Boys and Head Girls have previously been Prefects simply because high marks are one of the criteria for choosing a Prefect, but there are other reasons as well. (Consider the factors that must have gone into the decision to appoint Ron rather than Harry as Gryffundor Prefect in their fifth year.) Also, since more than one boy or girl in a house may be excellent students (e.g., James, Sirius, and Remus), the one chosen as Prefect may not necessarily have the highest marks. In my view, Remus was chosen as Prefect even though his friends' marks were probably higher, but James became Head Boy because his marks were higher than those of any male student in his year. The fact that he was never a Prefect is irrelevant. At any rate, it seems that the criteria for choosing a Prefect are flexible, and I imagine that the Heads of Houses have a say in the matter even though the final decision is Dumbledore's. But Head Boy and Head Girl have nothing to do with Houses or previous status as Prefect. As far as I can see, they are honors based solely on academic performance. This is just my theory, of course. There may be some other explanation. I predict that in Book 7, the Head Boy and Head Girl will be Hermione and Ernie MacMillan (I can't imagine Ron as Head Boy unless his marks improve dramatically). But if Harry's grades are higher than Ernie's, he'll be Head Boy even though he was never a Prefect--unless some Ravenclaw outperforms him academically. (I'm voting for Ernie. Harry has enough to deal with already.) Carol From astrid at netspace.net.au Mon Nov 17 23:39:10 2003 From: astrid at netspace.net.au (Astrid Wootton) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:39:10 +1100 Subject: Of snakes and dragons Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85274 Carol says: While I don't want to speculate on a possible dragon ancestor for Harry, which seems to me to be getting a little far afield, I want to mention that, yes, there's a connection between snakes and dragons. Tolkien, who was influenced by Norse and Icelandic mythology, refers somewhere to a dragon called Scatha the Worm, with "Worm" meaning Snake. (Presumably Scatha slithers rather than flies, a wingless, snakelike dragon.) >>>>>>> CS Lewis has written a poem ?The Dragon Speaks? in which the relationship between between worm and dragon are spelt out. Here is the 3rd stanza: Often I wish I had not eaten my wife (Though worm grows not to dragon till he eats worm). She could have helped me, watch and watch about, Guarding the gold; the gold would have been safer. I could uncoil my tired body and take Sometimes a little sleep while she was watching. If anyone wants the whole poem * 6 stanzas* I shall be happy to send it. Astrid [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dbonett at adelphia.net Mon Nov 17 23:38:59 2003 From: dbonett at adelphia.net (dtbonett) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:38:59 -0000 Subject: male/female role models In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85275 Dennis wrote: > I think they happens when an author begins their book with the wrong goal in > mind. Instead of, "I'm going to come up with the best possible book I can," > they think, "I'm going to come up with a book with a female lead." > > I think this is focusing on the wrong goal from the off Thank you, Dennis, for this very perceptive comment. I do indeed think that this is the problem with many books written nowadays. Not just about girls either. You could switch that to "I'm going to come with a black lead" (I am black) etc. etc. My kids who all love to read have had trouble in school with being intensely bored with the required reading (which is indeed dull, I have to say; I tried some of the books myself and hate them too). Dennis: Instead of fruit > or daggers, might I be so bold as to throw a couple of books I enjoyed > *with* female leads, "Anne of Green Gables" and anything from the "Little > House on the Prairie" series. Mirror adds: There are plenty of other books (including or maybe even especially fantasy) with girls as the heroes such as Alice in Wonderland, The Wizard of Oz, all of Charlotte Bronte, Pride and Prejudice (a favorite of Rowlings and not past the understanding of an intelligent 12 or 13 year old) plenty of the fairy tales (a favorite of mine was East of the Sun and West of the Moon), the Narnia books have girls in starring roles (Lucy is certainly the heroine whenever she appears and later books usually have pairs, such as Jill and Eustace, with Jill being equally important). What about princess Eilonwy in the Chronicles of Prydain? Pippi Longstocking was very popular with my sons, if you are talking younger kids. I identify with the girl sometimes in a book and with the boy sometimes (or women or man) and feel severely annoyed when people suggest that there is something wrong with someone who doesn't take only their own sex/race or whatever as their only role models. This is a VERY silly modern idea--I thought the idea behind literature was to make you understand others, not to build a little ghetto for yourself, reading only about people exactly like you, doing the current politically correct thing. Mirror From Zarleycat at aol.com Tue Nov 18 01:50:28 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 01:50:28 -0000 Subject: Endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85276 > Marianne wrote: > > I can see JKR stripping Harry of his magic powers, in some final > battle with V., but letting Harry live, thus keeping Warner Brothers > happy by not killing off the hero of the story. Harry will be the > hero who vanishes from the world he saved, remaining behind only in > story or myth. He'll no longer be part of the wizard world, but will > never truly feel part of the muggle world, either. > Berit replied: > > I can't believe anybody can see such an ending coming :-) It would be > downright cruel of Rowling to throw Harry a fate like that. Death > would be much more merciful if you ask me. So no, I don't think > Rowling will end her books like that :-) > Yes, it would be downright cruel, but JKR is on record as saying that one has to be ruthless in writing children's books. In a way, I'd be happy with the thought of Harry fading into Muggle obscurity, owning an eclectic book store located in a seedy part of town, that only stocks works on magic... I'd certainly be happier with that ending than with Harry completing his hero's journey by dying after he vanquishes the bad guy. Marianne From nibleswik at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 01:51:27 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 01:51:27 -0000 Subject: The Case for Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85277 > I must say it is with some fear that I attack one of the most formidable (and twisted) theory of HPFGU : ESE!Lupin. > 1) Lupin could very well have killed Sirius. > I agree that it is not possible to prove that Lupin did not > kill Sirius. But there is something I think is quite hard to > understand if he did. Why did he held Harry ? For all we know, > Harry was "sprint[ing] toward the dais." Without Lupin, he would > have jumped right through it, wouldn't he ? And that would mean no > more Harry. So why would an ESE!Lupin prevent Harry from > committing suicide ? Me: I am far from a proponent of ESE!Lupin, but I think you assume too much in this argument. First and most obvious, you assume that going beyond the veil would kill Harry. We don't know what's beyond the veil -- it could be a land of cotton candy and s'mores. I don't think Sirius is dead because he fell beyond the veil; I think he's dead because he was shot in the chest! He was dead before he disappeared. What if Voldie and the DEs know what's beyond the veil, and it's something Harry Potter must not see? What if Voldemort just wanted Harry alive for another reason? (I know he tried to get DD to kill Harry in OotP, but I don't think that was really in earnest. Tom Riddle knows DD well enough that he knew the man wouldn't kill Harry.) There could be any number of reasons for an Evil!Lupin to want to keep Harry from sprinting toward the dais. Cheekyweebisom From alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 18 02:31:12 2003 From: alshainofthenorth at yahoo.co.uk (alshainofthenorth) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 02:31:12 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85278 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kyliemckenzie1225" wrote: > < are green, or that they're green just like his mother's. If it only > matters that he has his mothers eyes, she could have blue eyes in the > movie. If it matters that they are green, well then, that's another > story. Slytherin's are symbolized by the color green, but who really > knows what JKR has in that wonderful head of hers.>> Couldn't find Joj's original post, sorry... Eyes are the windows of the soul, or so the trite saying goes. Has anyone ever had the simple yet beautiful idea that Harry having his mother's green (quite unusual and memorable) eyes is a metaphor for him having a mind and a spirit like the one of his mum rather than his dad? That he views the world like she might (his compassion for Snape, for example?) James is still a good guy in my books, but I don't think he scored very high on ethics or empathy. He was the cool, intelligent, popular one who had the easy life -- properties that people keep projecting on The Boy Who Lived, defeater of You-Know-Who, youngest Seeker in a century, extremely talented in DADA, etc. His "Inner Harry" seems to be more similar to Lily. Kylie, I think the "red + green = gold" theory is rather interesting as well. Just as another thought, could the fact that the combination of the forces is golden have some significance? Alshain From hieya at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 03:37:50 2003 From: hieya at hotmail.com (greatlit2003) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 03:37:50 -0000 Subject: Predictions: The children's future careers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85279 I'm sorry if others have already posted the following ideas, I haven't read everything, but here are my predictions for the ending of HP: Assuming that the trio will survive (and I think they have a good chance, since there have been enough major deaths already), I was thinking that it would be quite funny if JKR gave her hero a writing career. Why do I think this? Because it would be a shout-out to all the writers out there. Because the wizarding world needs to be more creative, and less focused on fighting. Because I think Harry will end up with Looney Lovegood, and her family is involved in journalism. Only, I don't think that Harry will work with the Quibbler. Rather, I think that he will be the anti-Rita Skeeter working at the Daily Prophet. After his final battle with V-mort, I imagine that Harry will want a quiet life, yet still actively engaged in the activities of the wizarding world, much as DD prefers to remain headmaster while heading the Order. I imagine that Hermione will continue S.P.E.W. , but with more support and resources. After the Death Eaters are defeated and the Order disbands, I think that #12 Grimmauld Place would be ideal headquarters for S.P.E.W. It would be a fitting way to respect Sirius's memory, by trying to eradicate the forces that killed him (at least in part). I'd give a hundred Galleons to see the look on Mrs. Black's face when Dobby & company march in, ready to eat at the table, not just clean it. I think that Ron might become an Auror. Ron has shown good strategic skills (i.e. chess), and he has some leadership qualities. I think he lacks confidence, but he may well develop that in the next two books. I imagine Ron as a less-paranoid version of Moody. Moody is a talented wizard and good at defense, strategy, etc. but ultimately he is beneath Dumbledore. I think that this will happen in Ron and Harry's professional relationship throughout their lives. Outside of the trio, I think that Neville Longbottom will become Potions Master at Hogwarts. I imagine he will be the sort of teacher that Remus Lupin was, only without the monthly fits. I am worried that JKR might kill off one of the twins, since she has made it quite plain that they are one soul and probably could not live without each other. Will the surviving twin become lonely and depressed a la Sirius (since there does seem to be a big parallel between the twins and Sirius: rebellious, problems with mother, outcastes in family, has a best friend who is like a soulmate) or will Weasleys Wizard Wheezes continue? I think that Fred/George will continue his work, with or without his twin. With Sirius, I think JKR tried to show a man who could not rebuild his life (not entirely his fault). Sirius remained immature; his growth seemed to have stopped from the time he was sent to Azkaban. His attitude towards Harry (a friend and brother rather than son), his persistent hostility towards Snape (calling him Snivellus), even his manner of speaking (which was not as polished and mature as Lupin's) all suggested that Sirius was unable to grow up and move on. He remained that way to the last moment of his life. With the next generation, JKR will show some growth. Granted, the twins won't suffer as much as Sirius did, but I think that they will develop a sense of responsibility and maturity while maintaining the roguish charm that has made them such endearing characters. greatlit2003 who hopes that Fred and George will both live to a ripe old age From AllieS426 at aol.com Tue Nov 18 04:28:49 2003 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 04:28:49 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's Army In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85280 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > Lord Voldemort could have an army of a thousand plus Dementors, the > Giant population, potentially the Goblins and goodness know what > other Dark creatures. A very scary thought. > > Mandy Quite scarier, and scarier still: how does one destroy a Dementor? We know that "expecto patronum" (which even most wizards can't do) will chase them away, but it doesn't kill them or destroy them. They're the ultimate weapon, an unbeatable army. UNLESS... maybe it's a job for house-elf magic... :) Allie From erinellii at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 04:28:25 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 04:28:25 -0000 Subject: Predictions: The children's future careers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85281 "greatlit2003" wrote: here are my predictions for the ending > of HP: > Outside of the trio, I think that Neville Longbottom will become > Potions Master at Hogwarts. I imagine he will be the sort of teacher that Remus Lupin was, only without the monthly fits. Erin: So, did you read the same interview I did? The one that went: ******************* Anyway, it's very exciting. We just love Harry Potter. We're curious - --- well first of all we can't wait for Books 4, 5, 6 and 7. But after that, we're curious as to whether Harry is going to have a life after Hogwarts, or if maybe, Harry might be a Hogwarts teacher. JKR: Well, because all your kids said `hello' so nicely in the background there, I am going to give you information I haven't given anyone else and I will tell you that one of the characters, one of Harry's classmates, though it's not Harry himself, does end up a teacher at Hogwarts. But, it is not, maybe the one you think, hint, hint, hint. Yeah, one of them does end up staying at Hogwarts, but --- - Do the kids want to guess at it, Kathleen? Do you guys have a guess as to who it is? (Kids shouting in background) Ron They say Ron. JKR: No, it's not Ron. I can't see Ron as a teacher. No way. ********************** Erin: So I agree with you that it will be Neville. But, just curious, why potions? Do you think Snape will die, or get the DADA job, or what? Personally, I think Neville teaching DADA or Herbology is more likely. Erin From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 18 04:38:23 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2003 23:38:23 EST Subject: In Defence of Lupin ( very, very long) Part ONE Message-ID: <102.38f46c6d.2ceafc3f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85282 The ESE!Lupin theories have been floating around this list ever since I joined last year. I have read every post that has come to my mailbox on the possibilities of Lupin being a horrible, lying, e-vile character. Yet, I am still steadfast in my beliefs that he is one of our most wonderfully compassionate and kind hearted characters. So, without further adieu, I give you 'In Defence of Lupin'. The first glimpse of Lupin we have is in PoA on the Hogwarts Express. pg. 59 PoA UK Cl. 'This one only had one occupant, a man sitting fast asleep next to the window....' '...The stranger was wearing an extremely shabby set of wizard's robes which had been darned in several places. He looked ill and exhausted. Though quite young, his light brown hair was flecked with grey.' As a first introduction to a character, JKR does not give us any sign or loathing on HHrR's parts. The take note of him, realise who he is and in fact use his presence to their advantage when Draco and Company come by their compartment on the train. Usually, JKR's descriptions of evil characters have a certain essence to them; it's the nature of her writing, and she has an ability to paint the picture for her writers. Although the appearance of Barty!Moody and Real!moody are the same, she wrote the characters differently. But, I will come on to that a bit later. As the Dementor Chapter of PoA progresses, Lupin finally awakes to ward off the dementor on pgs 66 and 67, PoA UK ed. Cl. He does not fear honesty with his students as he explains the dementor is from Azkaban, and he passes chocolate round. As has been mentioned in previous posts when he returns to the compartment to find the chocolate uneaten, he does tell everyone, 'I haven't poisoned it, you know'. Many people have taken this statement as foreshadowing to his eventual evilness. But, I read something quite different. Lupin knows who Harry is. No doubt, DD had already explained Harry's first two years to Lupin before he, Lupin that is, took the DADA teaching post. Lupin, knowing that Harry was the son of his best friend, knowing what Harry had endured from childhood until that moment, and believing Sirius Black to be headed for Harry would certainly understand that Harry and company would be less than trusting of a strange man. After all, without all of Harry's previous experiences, I would still think that if I were sitting on the train to school, a dementor walked in and a man I had never met warded it off, I would be a little trepidatious. Thus, I do not read ill intention in Lupin's statement. Although some of the staff is unwelcoming to Lupin's arrival as DADA teacher, and we are told that staff knows he is a werewolf, it does not seem to be a point of contention for Madam Pomfrey. She seems rather pleased to discover (pg 70 PoA UkEd Cl) that Lupin gave Harry chocolate on the train. 'We've finally got a Defence against the Dark Arts teacher who knows his remedies.' On this same page, she is described as give an approving look when Harry informs her that Lupin gave him the chocolate. There is a lack of applause from students when DD introduces Harry because no one has much faith in the DADA teachers, and rightly so. Hogwarts in the two previous years had seen two pathetic DADA instructors. Lockhart, of course IMHO being the worst of the two, was a bumbling fool who had no real DADA experience. ( At least Quirrel had taken some time to train up in the field.) However, there is only one mention of a Professor who looks on reproachfully, and that is our dear potions master, Snape. At this point in the series, the only reason we have for Snape's look of disgust at Lupin is his ever infamous desire to teach DADA. We do not know of their history, yet, but as JKR describes his look, it is more venomous than it has ever been to any of the previous DADA professors. I do not think that this is ESE foreshadowing, but rather foreshadowing to the history which unfolds in POA, GoF, and OoP. Again, as we have all discussed here, JKR doesn't throw anything into the books without a reason. I think that stretching Snape's response to Lupin to equate Lupin being ESE is too much. Snape has plenty of reason to LOATHE Lupin. But, since I am trying to go chronologically with the books, I will come on to that a bit later. When HHrR finally have their first DADA lesson, it is practical. We, I believe, had only seen one 'practical lesson' previously, and that was with Lockhart. In comparison, it was atrocious. Lupin's lesson, as we find out in later books, is a very important one. We see what the Boggart can do to Molly Weasley, a seasoned witch, so he starts he year with something that is important to Defence in the WW. Before he even begins the lesson on the Boggarts, he impresses his students with 'Waddiwassi' when he and the class meet Peeves in the corridor. It doesn't seem like much of anything, I suppose, but it gave an essence of 'cool' to Lupin to his students. The fact that Lupin immediately stands up to Snape on Neville's behalf, always struck me as a bit of gold in Lupin's character. Neville who has yet to show us the great powers I believe him to have, has always been picked upon by his Professors for his clumsiness. However, none have inflicted abuse of such proportions as Snape. So, when Snape insults Neville in front of Lupin and his class, Lupin's reaction was a bit surprising. Lupin gave something Neville only receives one other time in canon, and that encouragement. This may seem as though it is simply just a small thing, but for a child like Neville, one vote of confidence is very important. This sets Neville for a bit more self esteem further on down the road. Many people have argued that Lupin stops the Boggart before it reaches Harry because he really is Voldemort's supporter. I still don't see this. When I first read PoA, I thought exactly what Lupin states later on in the book- that LV would appear in the staff room. It didn't seem as though he were hiding anything, but rather protecting his class and Harry. Another issue that we see around this time in PoA is Draco's loathing of Lupin- which continues ad nauseum, but if Lupin really were ESE, it would make sense for Draco to want to buddy up to him. Slytherins are cunning and want power. If Lupin were evil and in with LV and the DEs, I would think Draco would seek him out. Draco doesn't do this. Now, when Harry visits Lupin's office the day of the first Hogsmeade visit, there has been a great deal of discussion as to Lupin's behaviour. Many people have theorised that his reactions are of a man hiding his ESE side. But, when I really look into the conversation and his actions, I see something completely different. ( PoA pg 116 UK ed Cl) First off, Lupin shows Harry the Grindylow, which seems, again unimportant, but proves to be VERY important to Harry in GOF. Then, he is sensitive to Harry's situation with Trelawny, and even though when I read it I sense a bit of humour in his tone, he still cares. PoA Uk Ed pg 117 Harry asks Lupin why Lupin stopped Harry from his go at the Boggart 'Well, said Lupin, frowning slightly. 'I assumed that if the Boggart faced you, it would assume the shape of Lord Voldemort.' Again, much speculation has been read into this comment. Harry is even surprised as Dumbledore is the only person who has ever said LV's name. However, I still don't think that this signifies any ties between Lupin and LV. We see in canon, most of LV's followers call him the 'Dark Lord'. Dumbledore is insistent that people should refer to Voldemort *by* his name. I think that Lupin took a leaf out of Dumbledore's book. Also, I think when your best friends have been murdered by someone, it is a bit ridiculous to call him ' you know who'. Lupin shows that he is made of tougher stuff than quite a few others, so I am not surprised in the least that he would refer to LV by his name. (Neville who is the only other person who directly has suffered at the hand of LV, who is Harry's age, doesn't refer to him as anything because he doesn't want people to know what happened to his parents and that they are in St. Mungo's. ) As for the potion, again, I have read theories that allude to the fact that there is more to the potion than meets the eye. But, I truly believe that Lupin is grateful for having Snape, who is skilled, even if he can be a great git, at Hogwarts to brew it for him. Harry's distrust of the situation is due out of his distrust for Snape. The whole dynamic in PoA between Lupin and Snape is where many of the ESE theories are derived, I think. Lupin as we see in this scene and in his general dealings with Snape is very much light hearted. He doesn't seem to be very interested in anything that has to do with Snape. PoA UK ED Cl pg. 118, Harry tells Lupin that Snape is very interested in the DADA appointment. 'Really?' said Lupin, looking only mildly interested as he took another gulp of potion. Lupin isn't particularly interested. He knows that Snape loathes him. Now, whether he allows Harry to assume that Snape despises him for just being the DADA instructor to keep up appearances or because he was instructed to do so by DD to prevent the mayhem that ensues when he is discovered to be a werewolf is unknown. But, again, this 'deception' as many of the ESE!Lupin-ers would call it, isn't exactly deception in the way it would have to be for it to fit the ESE!Lupin theory. Is it deceptive for Lupin to allow Harry to assume that Snape's hatred is only based on the DADA position? Or, really, at this point is it any of Harry's business? Harry is a student. As a teacher, it would be improper for Lupin to speak negatively of his colleagues. It is neither here nor there in a teacher student relationship- which is the relationship that Lupin and Harry enjoy at this point in PoA- whether two teachers do or do not like one another or whether or not they have a sordid past. It is the job of the teacher to instruct to the best of his abilities, to support, and to nurture his students. So, to say that because Lupin does not reveal all the truths to Harry because he is ESE or untrustworthy is really just rubbish. It is not his place to do so, nor is it in any way proper. In the next Lupin related scene in PoA, we see Snape who without inhibition opprobriates Lupin and his teaching skills to an entire class room. He sets an essay, knowing full well and good that someone clever would sight the similarities, on werewolves. This is not the behaviour of someone who has any respect for his fellow professors, nor is it in any way appropriate. Yet, ESE!Lupin theorisers seem to wish that Lupin would act out in this manner rather than to keep his cool and be respectful of someone as horrible as Snape. In fact, one of the only times we see a hint of glee in Lupin at any negativity towards Snape is pg 139 PoA UK Ed. Cl. : 'Professor Lupin smiled at the look of indignation on every face.' This is really as far as any hint of dislike for Snape goes with Lupin. In that moment of uprise from his class, he could have, indeed, said anything he wanted to about Snape and most likely everyone would have agreed with him. But, he did not. Now, again, it has been argued that this is because Lupin and Snape are both ESE characters and that Lupin likes Snape, but there isn't any evidence of it in canon. On that same page, Lupin holds Harry back after the class has left. He gives Harry a hint as to the Whomping Willow. He doesn't say why it was planted, but that it was planted the year he came to Hogwarts. If Harry had done the essay, he may have put two and two together. Lupin continues on showing concern for Harry. He asks about Harry's broom and inquires if the Dementors were the reason Harry fell. He reassures Harry that weakness is not the reason that the Dementors have such an effect on him and that Harry should not be ashamed. Then on page 140, the ever popular slip of the briefcase. Again, this has been argued as a sign of ESE!Lupin-ness. Another point which I have never agreed with because it just doesn't make sense to me. Lupin's briefcase slips from his hold when Harry mentions that Sirius escaped pass the Dementors. It slips at the mention of Sirius's name. We know later on in the book that Lupin hid the fact that Sirius, James, and Peter were Anamagi. Sirius has already broken into the castle once at this point in the story. Lupin is ridden with guilt. He is angry at himself, he is questioning whether keeping the truth from DD is a good idea or if he should betray the only friends he has ever known. Does this make him evil? Not in my eyes. Instead, I see a man who has had a less than happy life trying to weigh the merits of a friendship that is all he has ever had and the fatherly/employer/mentor relationship he has with DD. He is caught between his word to his best friends and his word to DD. DD, Lupin and PPW lied to since school days. Lupin has never betrayed PPW. So, was he doing the right thing? Not really. But, was he acting in an evil fashion? No. Yes, to a degree at this point he is endangering the lives of Harry and the entire population of Hogwarts. But, there is a part of him that doesn't believe in what he knows of the past because of what he KNOWS to be true of his best friends. I suppose this is a point of contention for many people. However, Lupin, I think has a feeling deep down inside that makes him think there is a possibility that Sirius is innocent. He knows what is in store for Sirius if and when he is captured. I think there is a part of Lupin that wants to find the whole truth about what happened as well. Back to the book, Lupin offers up some Anti-dementor lessons and Harry is given the Marauder's Map. Some people have said in the past that Lupin's teaching of the Patronus charm was inappropriate because it was well beyond magic that Harry should have been doing at thirteen years old. Quite the contrary, I thought Lupin was brilliant for this. As we see in PoA, much of what he teaches in the third year has great significance later on in the books. Lupin's excellent lessons prepare Harry for the Triwizard Tournament the following year. And, furthermore, Harry isn't exactly your normal student. I think when you have the Dark Lord after you, it is best to be taught any defence and spell there is. Lupin teaching Harry the Patronus charm does a few things. Once, it helps Harry prepare for the one thing that Lupin knows makes him happy- the upcoming Quidditch match. Two, it gives Harry the knowledge and power to protect himself later in book three, in the Triwizard Tourney, and in OoP. Thirdly, it helps with Harry's confidence. Although he is slow to learn the complicated charm, when he finally does make progress, and later when he conjures his perfect patronus, he has confidence we rarely see Harry have in his magic. And finally, through his fully fledged corporeal patronus, his father rides again. ( Note, none of this is in any way evil.) Pg 178 PoA UK Ed Cl, Lupin stutters a bit when he explains to Harry that James was his friend in school, and later when Harry asks if Lupin knew Sirius. Again, this is not a man who is ESE and deceptive. This is a man who is a teacher, who has a tie to his student that has never been explained, who has a great affection for said student, and who is still uncertain of the real facts of the past. Why does he not expand on his knowledge of James and Sirius to Harry? I think it boils down to fears and whether or not it is A) appropriate or B) something that DD wants or C) something that would lead to pain for Harry and questions that Lupin could not answer. If you really step back and put yourself in Lupin's shoes, what would you have done at this point. Would you have come out and told Harry everything? Even DD has struggled with when it is right to explain things to Harry. I think we forget that Harry is JUST thirteen at this point. He is a thirteen year old boy who has no clue as to his importance. Harry is the guardian of the WW, albeit, he doesn't know this yet. Harry is a child who lost both of his parents, who has never had a real sense of family, who only really has his three best friends point in the books. Which brings me to this. Lupin must see a reflection of himself in Harry's situation. Although we know that Lupin had parents, he still really only had PPW at school. His friends were the most important thing in the world to him. Just as Harry's are to him. We see a bit of Lupin's ways in Harry. When Harry is angry with his friends, he behaves more as Lupin. Ron on the other hand behaves a bit more like Snape. Ron is open and unabashed with his anger, while Harry, who may be just as angry is more introverted with it. He lashes out, yes, but not nearly to the magnitude of Ron. I don't think this is just coincidental. Back to the books. I think that Lupin has a suspicion that Harry has gotten his hands on the map when Harry gives a joyful shout of 'Butterbeer! Yeah, I like that stuff!' on pg 182 PoA UK Ed Cl. But, as a real Marauder, he doesn't inquire. He lets it slip by without too much notice. This is another point for many of the ESE!Lupin fans. It has been said that Lupin is reckless to allow Harry to be led outside of the castle with Black on the loose. But, because he has no real evidence at this point that Harry has the map, and Harry's explanation of knowing butterbeer is good enough, he doesn't say anything. Again, I don't think he is acting evil. Somewhere deep down inside, he may know, but still, he sees James in Harry. Lupin also plants a seed in Harry when Harry says that Sirius deserves the Dementor's Kiss. This seed grows to Harry saving Peter's life in the Shrieking Shack IMHO. When Lupin discovers that Harry has indeed had the Marauder's Map, he does save him from a spot of trouble with Snape; however, he does something extraordinary. He confiscates the map and somewhat angrily explains his surprise that Harry did not hand it in. Whether or not this is due to him not wanting Harry to know that one of the map's manufacturers was infact staring him in the face, or because Lupin wanted the map to keep an eye on Harry, or if there were any of a million other reasons we do not know. But, someone who was evil and wanted harm to befall Harry would not have taken the map. Lupin was acting as teacher responsible for the well fare of his students. Since Lupin still did not know the facts of Sirius's experiences and Wormtail's escape, he did the right thing. It could be argued and has been that as well as taking the map from Harry, he should have gone to DD with the whole truth. Many people have claimed this to be evil, as I stated earlier. But, there is a difference in Lupin's deafness to DD in knowing that Sirius was an unregistered anamagus and Harry running amok around Hogsmeade where NO one could keep a direct eye on him or his safety. Lupin was indeed protecting Harry, himself, and to some degree James, Sirius and Peter. The only real time we see Lupin almost lose control of his emotions is the next scene in which we find him. He is only angry because Hermione will not hear him out on the matter of Sirius and the truth of Lupin. pg 253 PoA UK ED Cl ' Hermione, listen to me please!," Lupin shouted' This is, I think the only instance where we see Lupin actually raise his voice at anyone. He then returns to his calm collected self and explains everything. He goes on to explain that DD had to work very hard to get some of the staff to trust him, the map, everything. Even in Chapter MWP&P when Sirius speaks of Snape with utter loathing, Lupin remains on an even, fair keel. He does not falter. In chapter nineteen, pg 263 PoA Uk Ed Cl, he only insults Snape mildly, ' "You fool," said Lupin softly. "Is a schoolboy grudge with putting an innocent man back inside of Azkaban."' And, rightly so, does he say this. Snape is being foolish. Rather than hear anyone out, Snape reacts to his own hatred of Sirius and Remus. He wants them both dead without explanation. Lupin merely tries to calmly stop him. Infact, in this whole chapter, there is only one person with the presence of mind to keep his cool and to act rationally, and that person is Lupin. Tempers flare for all the other characters, but Lupin remains calm and collected. He understands that the whole truth must come out to everyone. He understands Ron kept Scabbers/Peter as a pet for many years, he understands the absurdity of Black's tale, he sees the fear in Hermione for attacking Snape, but yet, he does everything with great compassion and caution, knowing that one single fact forgotten could change the entire situation. When everyone leaves the Shrieking Shack and Lupin transforms into the werewolf, there has been talk that he accidentally forgot to take the Wolfsbane on purpose that night. Again, I find this theory to be rubbish. Clearly, when Lupin saw the children out of bounds, Peter Pettigrew AND Sirius Black all on the grounds, he dashed from his office without thought. But, as we see when Snape arrives at the Shack, Snape had not yet brought the potion to Lupin. Was this careless, possibly, but HARDLY intentional. Lupin had to flee his office to aid in the scene that was to take place in the Shrieking Shack. I doubt he had a moment to think after seeing the map. Again, Snape thwarts Lupin by informing his House that Lupin is a werewolf. This makes it impossible in light of the previous night's events for him to stay on as Professor. Because of the misconceptions of werewolves in the WW, Lupin is betrayed again by Snape. No one would want their child taught by a werewolf despite wolfsbane which makes him harmless. I believe that Lupin resigns himself to thinking he is dangerous to comfort his own hurt at losing the post. He also gives the Marauder's Map back to Harry with some hesitation. In a way, the map is his birth right IMO. Lupin knows this. Surely, he knows that it will not always be used for good, but it is, other than the stag patronus, the only legacy of James Lupin has to give? Reckless? YES! And, so were MPPW. Evil? No. Lupin leaves Hogwarts with a place in the heart of many. So, what we can gather from PoA, which is really only part one of two of the Defence of Lupin, is a great deal. Lupin leaves us with a new understanding that what is known about a certain type of person is not always fact. If werewolves are untrustworthy and violent, why did he in the end tell everyone everything he could? Why would he be willing to sacrifice his own life for the lives of others? His friendships with Padfoot and Prongs were the deepest relationships in his life. A man with an affliction that caused him to be hated by many, who was unable to find work of what he was, but who had friends who accepted him and broke every rule to help him was loyal to them. Was it completely right? No. But, had Lupin told DD from the start about Black, the truth may never have come out and the dementors might have captured him. Lupin's faith is really what saved his life. Now, as I have mentioned, Lupin keeps his calm. He is always compassionate, he is always kind-hearted. Many people have thought this suspicious. However, I see Lupin as more of a Buddhist character. His suffering in life has been, and still is great. Yet, he has either just in his nature or out of need developed a personality that runs along the lines of Buddhist teachings. We rarely see him raise his voice. He looks at everything with compassion, love, peace, and concern. He loyal and honourable. He seems to have a certain inner peace that many of our other characters are lacking, despite his inner conflict in PoA. He in many ways shows he walks in the footsteps of the Buddha with his handling of life and the people in his life. Just look at his treatment of Snape if you need further convincing. ;) -Tonks, who is loony for Lupin, and is dreading writing part two of the Defence. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From navarro198 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 04:38:40 2003 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 04:38:40 -0000 Subject: Endings In-Reply-To: <000801c3ad60$b979aa90$0e00a8c0@sunstone77nev7> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85283 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "John Hatch" wrote: > John writes: > > I've always thought it's fairly obvious what Harry will do - be the Defense > Against the Darks Arts teacher at Hogwarts. I'm not saying it's obvious to > be snotty to other theories :) It just seems like JKR has set it up pretty > well. No one else can do the job, how about Harry Potter? Besides, there's > nothing that says Harry can't be a teacher and an auror. If trouble comes, > someone can watch his class for a few days. I think Harry would make a good teacher, but it doesn't seem to be in the tea leaves. JKR said: "I will tell you that one of the characters, one of Harry's classmates, though it's not Harry himself, does end up a teacher at Hogwarts." http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/1999/1099- connectiontransc.html Ravenclaw Bookworm From sydenmill at msn.com Tue Nov 18 04:52:15 2003 From: sydenmill at msn.com (bohcoo) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 04:52:15 -0000 Subject: The Ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85284 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Laura Ingalls Huntley wrote: Laura, post #85264: > I don't know if you've read it, but the fanfic "Come Together" by > Granger is written on a similar theme. Bohcoo replies: No, unfortunately, I don't read fanfic -- yet. I am so enthralled with the staggering analyses and theories presented here that I find my thoughts and opinions winging around all over the spectrum of possibilities. My thought of Harry and Voldemort melding together at the final showdown into some sort of whole was prompted by Dumbledore's statement, "But in essence divided," which Harry and LV are at the moment. That statement presented, to my mind, the possibility of some version of unity to come, even if that unity destroys both Harry and LV as individuals when it happens. I also have gotten the half-formed (okay, half-baked) notion that the Boy Who Lived might not have been Harry at all. Perhaps Harry Potter was killed that night along with his parents -- and LV transferred enough of himself into the baby to survive. So, then, LV exists in two places, "in essence divided," and Harry Potter will not be killed in the end because he is already gone. Just one theory, among oh so many whirling around in my imagination. We hear of Neville (badly) performing a Switching Spell and landing his ears on a cactus -- why couldn't Lilly have performed a similar spell, leaving the baby with her eyes, literally, as others have mentioned? It always says, "You have your mother's eyes," but, "You look remarkably like your father." Now, not once does it say, "Your eyes look just like your mother's." Isn't that interesting? So, the Boy Who Lived could be some portion, some version of Tom Riddle who sees the world through Harry Potter's mother's eyes. Perhaps JKR is playing with the conceptions of perception, in all the ways the word can be interpreted. Am I convinced of any of this? Nope. But it sure does make me wonder. . . Mind candy. Laura further states, #85264: > JKR has repeatedly stated that she does not intend to write any books after the seventh, thereby negating the possibility of a story arc that occurs *after* the climatic scene in which Voldemort is destroyed (which naturally occurs at the end of the seventh book). Bohcoo repies: Quite true, but she has also said that she will provide some sense of "closure," some idea of what happens to "the ones who survive." So, I am assuming an epilogue that presents the framework for futures for many of the characters and situations, leaving us with arcs galore for her fans to fanfic to their heart's content. Not to mention, as I have stated elsewhere, I think JKR will publish "Hogwarts, A History" later on. The book has been mentioned so much throughout the series and it would be a wonderful way for her to include the Harry Potter story summary as part of that lore. (Or, should I say, "lure?") Warm regards, Bohcoo From zanelupin at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 05:31:15 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:31:15 -0000 Subject: The Case for Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85285 Cheekyweebisom: >What if Voldie and the DEs know what's beyond the veil, and it's something Harry Potter must not see? What if Voldemort just wanted Harry alive for another reason? (I know he tried to get DD to kill Harry in OotP, but I don't think that was really in earnest. Tom Riddle knows DD well enough that he knew the man wouldn't kill Harry.) There could be any number of reasons for an Evil!Lupin to want to keep Harry from sprinting toward the dais.< KathyK: Evil!Lupin had no choice but to stop Harry regardless of Voldemort's plans for him as Dumbledore was right there watching Sirius go through the archway. Even if Dumbledore didn't see where Harry was, he did turn toward the dais as Sirius fell through and might have noticed Harry hurtling toward the archway. Dumbledore would have stopped Harry, I believe, and then might have wondered why Lupin, who was right by Harry, didn't stop him. As far as Voldemort not wanting Harry dead, I point you to this that Voldemort does on p 812 of the US edition of OOP: "I have nothing more to say to you, Potter," he said quietly, "You have irked me too often, for too long, AVADA KEDAVRA!" I think that speaks very clearly to his wanting Harry dead. However his DE's could have been under orders to keep Harry alive until they could get their hands on the prophecy. At the point where Lupin grabs Harry, Harry and Neville remain the only ones aware the prophecy ball has been broken. Lupin could have stopped Harry to save the prophecy from being lost to Voldemort. KathyK, From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 18 05:56:26 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 00:56:26 EST Subject: one thing on prefects. Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85286 I am working on Lupin's defence part two, but something stuck out at me and I had to write, It would seem that Prefects are suggested by Heads of House. OoP UK Ed Cl page 155 'I was never made prefect myself,' said Tonks brightly from behind Harry as everybody moved towards the table to help themselves to food. Her hair was tomato red and waist-length today; she looked like Ginny's older sister. 'My Head of House said I lacked certain necessary qualities.' ' While I am sure that the Headmaster has final say.... -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sjhall at eden.rutgers.edu Tue Nov 18 02:05:33 2003 From: sjhall at eden.rutgers.edu (sand000d) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 02:05:33 -0000 Subject: Mister Figg....? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85287 A thought occurred to me the other day about HP and as usual I ran here and the lexicon to see if there was anyone else thinking this way, but I couldn't find anything. So, forgive me if it's been brought up. What I was thinking is, Arabella Figg uses the title Mrs. implying, obviously, that she is/was married. Now Mr. Figg may have been a muggle or another squib or maybe a wizard, who knows? But the fact that Mrs. Figg is a squib implies that she comes from wizarding blood. Is there ever any talk of what he maiden name is? Is this important at all or am I just taking things too far? Anyway, if someone else has brought this up, point me to the post cause I'd be interested to see what anyone else has to say on the matter. Thanks! From aaoconnor2002 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 03:09:47 2003 From: aaoconnor2002 at yahoo.com (aaoconnor2002) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 03:09:47 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85288 Over the past several days many people have posted thoughts and theories about Mark Evans and his possible relationship to Harry. Most people believe, and I agree, that it is too much of a coincidence to have a character named Evans appear when we know that Evans was also Lily's maiden name. Much thought has gone into how closely Mark and Harry could be related while still not contradicting Dumbledore's statements at the beginning of Sorcerer's Stone. Most people seem to be in favor of some degree of cousinhood. I fear, and fear is the correct word, that we may be looking at the situation too two-dimensionally (or three-dimensionally). What if Mark and Harry are not related yet? I'm not really sure why but I have never liked time travel stories. I did enjoy PoA immensely but, in my mind, it opened doors to places I really didn't want the story to go. The room in the DoM that was full of breaking and reassembling time turners leads me to believe that we haven't heard the end of time travel in this series. As implausible as it may sound, what if Mark is actually an ancestor of Harry? That would explain why Dumbledore couldn't take Baby Harry to Mark's parents even if Dumbledore knew there would be a connection eventually. Can you imagine the conversation? "Hello, Mr. and Mrs. Evans. In a few years you will have a son you will name Mark, but in the meantime please take care of Harry who will be your (fill in the number of greats) grandson." So, all we have to do to have this come to pass is have an 11 or 12 year old Mark get seriously zapped by a time turner sometime in the next two years (Hogwarts time). Hey, I didn't say it was probable. I didn't even say it was likely. I just know it's not impossible. Audrey (who can't believe she has de-lurked after some time to post this and will wear her yellow raincoat for the next 72 hours to protect herself from the inevitable rotten tomatoes) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 03:51:48 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 03:51:48 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: <001001c3ad26$e39cc350$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85289 Joj said: I commented this morning about Percy being in Gryffindor and not Slytherin. What I was saying was that so far, all we have seen is Percy's Slytherin quality (ambition), but we haven't seen his Gryffindor bravery yet. He is in Gryffindor, so it should follow that he's at least somewhat brave. Even Neville has shown more bravery. I think Percy is undercover myself. > Jen said: > Personally, I'd like to find out > MWPP were in Slytherin or someone from Gryffindor is a betrayer. > Joj said: I personally think MWPP were all in Slytherin. I like to imagine us finding this out when Harry asks Lupin point blank if they were. JKR wouldn't have been so careful to not say they were in Gryffindor, if she was going to make it that way. Why be so careful in all 5 books and all interviews, to never say what houses they were in, to do the obvious? It's not her style. Carol responds to both: Regarding Percy, I think he'll show true courage in the end (in fact, I think he has the makings of a tragic character, fatal flaw and all), but at the moment (unless he's under an Imperius curse, which I don't quite buy), all he's shown is obstinacy and pride. He's done what he believed in, following the rules and respecting (if not worshipping) authority, and can't bring himself to admit that he's completely wrong or think about the grief he's bringing to his mother by returning that sweater. Alas, poor Weatherby! If only he could have seen himself as the twins saw him and accepted their ridicule with good grace. As for a Gryffindor betrayer, I don't think it's Percy, really, though he certainly shows that Gryffindors arent't perfect. So, in my view, do the Marauders. For those of us who place them in Gryffindor based on courage (reckless or otherwise) as their predominant trait, we already have a betraying Death Eater Gryffindor, Peter Pettigrew. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 05:07:50 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:07:50 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85290 Carol said: I have a PhD in English, so I know a bit about tragedy, and of course I don't consider Shakespeare to be a substandard author. The Harry Potter series is not a tragedy in either its structure or its subject matter. If we're looking at genres, I would classify it as part fantasy novel, part epic, and part bildungsroman. Erin said: Do you count bildungsroman (a novel that shows the protagonist growing up, for those of you who don't know) as a genre? Genre, to me, is pretty much a marketing term, and I don't recall seeing that section the last time I went to the bookstore. I would say that fantasy and epics are the most likely places to find tragedy, which I would classify as a style rather than a genre. I won't deny that many authors do write so that you can neatly slot their books into a particular genre, but I don't think JKR is one of those. The dictionary's definition of a tragedy is that it is any literary composition with a somber theme, carried to a tragic conclusion. I would say that thus far, Harry is dealing with some somber themes. If he dies, boom, there's your tragic conclusion. Carol again: Erin, I think the difference in our view of what constitutes tragedy is largely the result of our different backgrounds. Believe me, if you'd spent as many years as I did in graduate school, you would see the bildungsroman as a genre (literary form) and view tragedy (which is also a genre, not a style) from a somewhat Aristotelian perspective. To me, tragedy is a dramatic, not a narrative, representation of a conflict in which the hero dies as an inevitable consequence of a hamartia (fatal error or tragic flaw). Tragedy is quite distinct from epic, which is a narrative genre. (Compare "Oedipus Rex," a tragedy, with the Iliad, an epic, to see the difference.) Modern writers have blurred the distinction but it's still perfectly possible to identify epic or tragic elements in a literary work like the Potter books, which are a hodgepodge of influences and techniques. As I said in a completely unrelated post, Percy (of all people) has some of the makings of a tragic hero about him: he may very well die as the inevitable consequence of his pride or obstinacy. But I don't see Harry as having a fatal flaw, so even if he dies, it won't be a tragic ending in the Aristotelian sense. OTOH, there's no question that the ending will be "tragic" in the modern, somewhat diluted sense of your dictionary definition. JKR has suggested strongly that more than one major character is going to die, but I don't think Harry will be one of them. She has too much imagination to simply kill him off--and despite her protestations about an author's control over her characters, I think she's just trying to maintain suspense by holding out the possibility that he might die. I much prefer to think that she'll give him a future as an auror, able to apply all the hard lessons he's learned but no longer alone and "marked," literally and figuratively. (Well, okay, he'll keep the scar.) If, as someone else has suggested, the dementors are still around after LV is destroyed, there will be a real need for our heroic and energetic young trio. (I think they'll all become aurors and Neville will become a teacher.) Carol, who is tired of sounding like she's still in graduate school and will be quite happy to drop this thread. Can we talk about Trelawney's prediction that Harry will have twelve children now? ;-) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 06:25:47 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 06:25:47 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory In-Reply-To: <20031117222819.75614.qmail@web25108.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85291 > Carol wrote: > > I think Petunia is Harry's only *known* relative. Dumbledore isn't > > lying or exaggerating: he's speaking the truth as he knows it. > > Udder Pendragon responded: > > The words are: UK PB Page15 > > > > "I've come to bring Harry to his aunt and uncle. They're the only > family he has left now." > > Carol: > Well, yes, but this is only one of several references, some of which > say "relative" rather than "family." And Petunia as his closest > (blood) relative is more important than the Dursleys as "family." > Interesting that "family" here includes Uncle Vernon, who is *not* a > blood relation. Hm. > > UPD wrote: > > This does not preclude Harry having other relatives. > > Carol: > I agree. I've been arguing for some five posts now that Mark Evans is > Harry's second cousin or something of the sort. > > > UPD wrote: > But if LP/PD's dad had a brother who was 15 or so years younger > than him. Then Mark E could be Harrys First Cousin > > Carol: > One small problem: In order for Mark and Harry to be first cousins, > Mark's father would have to be their brother. If Mark's father is > their father's brother (their uncle), Mark would be Lily and Petunia's > first cousin and Harry's first cousin once removed. It's simpler all > around if Mark's father is Lily and Petunia's slightly younger first > cousin, which would make Mark and Harry second cousins. > > Carol > U_P_D again > > Keeping in mind what JKR has said about not introducing new characters in the last two books. I think she would be very naughty to give Lilly and Petunia a brother at this stage. I would settle for first cousin once removed and how about his dad being married to a muggle born witch he met through Lilly. > > Udder Pendragon Carol again: Thanks for quoting my post, which has now disappeared from the archives because I accidentally deleted it intending to delete the one where I made the blunder. Now anyone who attempts to go up thread will find two missing posts. (Sorry, List Elves!) I just want to add that I'm sure you're right about JKR not adding a brother at this stage, but she'll certainly need to add more first-years, including, presumably, the mysterious Mark. I like the idea someone suggested that he is somehow "marked," like Harry. Very clever! Carol, who apologizes for not saying anything brilliant here but felt obligated to explain the mystery of the missing posts From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 07:05:55 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 07:05:55 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85292 Alshain wrote: Eyes are the windows of the soul, or so the trite saying goes. Has anyone ever had the simple yet beautiful idea that Harry having his mother's green (quite unusual and memorable) eyes is a metaphor for him having a mind and a spirit like the one of his mum rather than his dad? That he views the world like she might (his compassion for Snape, for example?) James is still a good guy in my books, but I don't think he scored very high on ethics or empathy. He was the cool, intelligent, popular one who had the easy life -- properties that people keep projecting on The Boy Who Lived, defeater of You-Know-Who, youngest Seeker in a century, extremely talented in DADA, etc. His "Inner Harry" seems to be more similar to Lily. Kylie, I think the "red + green = gold" theory is rather interesting as well. Just as another thought, could the fact that the combination of the forces is golden have some significance? Carol: I hope you're right that the green eyes reflect Lily's soul and that the resemblance rather than the color is significant. But what's extremely odd is that the eye colors and wand light colors are opposite. In other words, Voldemort has red eyes but the light from his wand is green, matching Tom Riddle's old house: Slytherin. Harry has green eyes but the light from his wand is red, matching the scarlet of Gryffindor. What on earth does it mean? It can't be that green (Slytherin) = evil and red or scarlet (Gryffindor) = good. That's too simplistic and the eyes suggest the exact opposite (though of course Slytherin = good and and Gryffindor = evil is even more absurd). The union of the houses? The end of rivalry and division at Hogwarts? Is gold associated with Fawkes the Phoenix? The only thing I can think of now that's golden is the snitch, and that leads us exactly nowhere. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 07:17:00 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 07:17:00 -0000 Subject: Predictions: The children's future careers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85293 "greatlit2003" wrote: > I'm sorry if others have already posted the following ideas, I > haven't read everything, but here are my predictions for the ending > of HP: > Outside of the trio, I think that Neville Longbottom will become > Potions Master at Hogwarts. I imagine he will be the sort of teacher > that Remus Lupin was, only without the monthly fits. Carol: I agree that Neville will become a Hogwarts teacher, but it never occurred to me that it would be in his least favorite subject, potions. How fitting! And if, as I hope, Snape is rewarded for his services in VW2 by receiving his coveted DADA post at last (freed of its jinx, thank you!), there will be a potions vacancy. So why not Neville, who by then will have earned Snape's respect? I agree with your prediction that Ron will become an auror and your assessment of Sirius, but I sincerely hope Hermione outgrows S.P.E.W.! Carol From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 18 08:18:45 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 03:18:45 EST Subject: In Defence Of Lupin ( very, very long) Part Two Message-ID: <140.1cc57dce.2ceb2fe5@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85294 Although Lupin leaves Hogwarts at the end of PoA, we know he is still a trusted friend of DD. At the end of GoF when the Ministry refuses to acknowledge the return of LV, DD send Sirius to alert others, including Lupin. And then we enter into book five, OoP. Lupin is sent to Privet Drive as one of the Guard for Harry. This seems to me to be a very noble task and one that would not be given to someone who was less than trustworthy. DD knows the prophecy. He knows Harry's value to the WW. Why send someone who could jeopardise that to fetch Harry at such a crucial time? Lupin is also the one that identifies Harry for Real!Moody's sake by asking about Harry's Patronus. Once everyone arrives safely at Grimmauld Place, Lupin again shows his calmness in dealing with the screaming portraits. He does not get angry or yell back at them, but rather, he simply deals with the situation with a certain ease. Lupin's own life horrors of living with being a werewolf with every full moon have probably influenced this calm nature. But, again, he shows no disrespect to anyone or anything. He simply is calm and handles the situations as the arise. Again, I do not think this calm nature is something of which we should be suspicious. I think, rather, that it is something to be admired. Lupin never allows his temper or emotions to get the best of him. He is ever vigilant, but ever calm. These are not attributes of Dark Wizards and Witches we have seen in the past. We have seen the Dark ones act on highly fuelled emotions. As Bellatrix Lestrange points out later in OoP, you cannot perform a deadly curse if you do not mean it. You have to have a certain emotional capacity and a certain grasp on anger to do these things. We have never seen Lupin exhibit this type of behaviour. On pg 80 of OoP UK ed Cl, we see Lupin interacting with Molly. Most of us regard Molly as someone who knows the good in people. She and Lupin are exceptionally friendly. It is as if she trusts Lupin more than Sirius if you review her interactions with both. It seems to me that she feels that Lupin is less likely to have a 'bad' influence on Harry than Sirius is. Although, I have a feeling that both Sirius and Lupin see Harry in a similar light despite any protests Lupin may have. Lupin may be more ready and able to make the distinction, but he certainly sees the similarities that could confuse the manner of relations with Harry. To take a moment from the chronological aspect of this post, when we look at Sirius and Remus we see two people with the same intentions and the same interests. But, we also see two people who react very differently. As we have all read OoP ( I hope), Lupin again deals with Harry with his sense of calm, when Sirius lashes out emotionally. However, there is a great similarity in the positions of both Sirius and Remus. Sirius is held up captive, for lack of a better word, in Grimmauld Place. It is true that Lupin is free to come and go, however, Lupin is a captive to his 'illness' and has been his whole life. I think that Lupin's resistance to saying much to Sirius about his behaviour is not due to a submissive position to Sirius, but out of understanding of Sirius's position. Sirius is an outcast. He cannot come and go as he pleases, and as Lupin never was to our knowledge in Azkaban, he has lived his life in a special kind of prison that has kept him, too, an outcast. There is more than their long time friendship at work here. There is a new common ground. And, although, Sirius has certain rights which may not be to Molly's liking as Harry's real guardian, he and Lupin have the best at heart. They just show it differently. Back to the Book. ( BTTB) On page 86 of OoP UK Ed Cl, Lupin Illustrates this. ' " Molly, you're not the only person at this table who cares about Harry.", said Lupin sharply. "Sirius, sit down." ' and again: ' "I think Harry ought to be allowed a say in this," Lupin continued, "he's old enough to decide for himself" Now whether is was the way Lupin said it in comparison to Sirius who basically said the same thing just in anger or not, Molly listened. This illustrates some of my point on Lupin. For a long time after PoA and GoF, there was an ESE!Sirius theory which I believe has been proven wrong. ( At least for me) Lupin is showing here his complete agreement with Sirius. Not so ESE, eh? BTTB Lupin shows on pg 87 his pleasure that Harry thwarts Voldemort at every step of the way. This would not be the reaction of an ESE!Lupin. An ESE!Lupin would either not comment or show some sign of dissatisfaction. Lupin has never wavered from his support of Harry. It just doesn't fit. On pg 89 Lupin shares a great deal of information with Harry as to what is going on in the WW. He also makes a statement of importance as far as I am concerned. 'And, I'm not a very popular dinner guest with most of the community.' said Lupin.' It's an occupational hazard of being a werewolf.' This again illustrates some of my previous points. Lupin really has no one except his friends. He has been forced into a life where he is judged by his affliction rather than his person. This all ties in back to PoA when he wrestled with what the right thing to do was. A man who only has his friends- friends he has had since a very young age- will go far to protect them and to find out the truth. Lupin goes on to show his compassionate side when discussing DD. There is a hint of sadness when he discusses DD being stripped of all his titles in the WW. He stands by DD. And, even though Lupin knows about the prophecy- OoP UK ed Cl pg 91, he says nothing. Again another point illustrated. He is acting on DD's orders. Harry doesn't know about the prophecy. I am uncertain if the OoP knows what it actually entails, but the fact is that Lupin keeps the secret, not to harm Harry but for DD. Another trustworthy move for Lupin. Lupin shows nothing but support for Harry. He is acting in some ways as a parent, as a mentor and as friend. When Harry awakes the morning of his Disciplinary Hearing. Lupin awaits him with the others in the Kitchen. He is showing his support. Would an evil person do this? Would an evil person care as much? I think not. Lupin tells Harry that the Wizarding Laws are on his side and that all will be ok. If Lupin were ESE, I would think he would hope to rid the WW of Harry. If Harry were expelled, his wand was snapped in two, and he was cast out from the WW, he wouldn't pose so much a threat to LV. In 'The Woes of Mrs Weasley' pg 155 Uk Ed Cl, Sirius and Lupin explain Lupin's appointment to Prefect. 'No one would have made me prefect. I spent to much time in detention with James. Lupin was the good boy, he got the badge.' ( Sirius) 'I think Dumbledore might have hoped I would be able to exercise some control over my best friends,' said Lupin. 'I need scarcely say that I failed dismally.' There are those that will argue that Lupin failed because he was a mean spirited evil person. But as we see later in OoP, it was more than just a small job to keep James and Sirius in 'good boy' form. Sirius obviously alludes to the fact that even 'too much time' in detention couldn't stop the two from running reckless through Hogwarts. Lupin again shows his quickness of mind and compassion later in the chapter when he runs in to find Molly sobbing over dead boggart bodies of the people she loves. He quickly disposes of the boggart and comforts Molly as she weeps at her own ability to be manipulated by the Boggart. He, again, is the giver of love and compassion as he reassure her that the Order is much better prepared than in the last battle with LV. And, again, I find myself looking at the ESE!Lupin theories astounded. ESE characters would not show this much love and compassion. Lupin is extraordinary in his ability to show this level of care. We have really yet to see a character with these attributes. He even makes a joke to comfort Molly when she is upset about her children dying. pg 161, he looks at her with a slight smile' What would we do? Let them starve?' To reiterate the fear of werewolves, I go to pgs. 431-32 of OoP Uk Ed. Cl. ' A werewolf?,' whispered Mrs Weasley, looking alarmed. 'Is he safe in a public ward? Shouldn't he be in a private room?' This is Molly for goodness sake! Molly who appears to adore Lupin! She is still concerned. The stigma of werewolf is almost unbearable. It reminds me of the beginning of the AIDS pandemic, which may very well be what JKR is after. There are too many parallels to mention them all. But, the treatment of werewolves is very much akin to that of PLWAIDS ( people living with AIDS) in the 80's and early 90s... and in some areas still. Sad, but true. In 'Christmas on the Closed Ward' we see a new side of Lupin. He and Sirius go in together on a lovely set of books for Harry for his Yule present. And, then at St. Mungo's we see him share his compassion and knowledge with the man who was bitten by a werewolf. Again, here, we see Lupin's way with people. It is not manipulative. It is sheer compassion. He has a way with people to show them the goodness in life. The man bitten by a werewolf had shown great anger on pg 432 when he threatened to give Arthur another bite. But, in dealing with Lupin, he seems more relaxed. We do not hear any threats or insults shouted. Lupin simply shows him compassion of a person in the same situation. ( Another AIDS Pandemic Parallel) Then, BTTB, Lupin is entrusted again, with Tonks to ensure Harry's safe return to Hogwarts. DD would certainly not give this task to someone ESE! Lupin time and time again is trusted by everyone. Some may argue this is part of his ESE persona, but I vehemently, still, disagree. I think for once we have a genuine character. Pg 569 OoP UK Ed Cl. It is true that Lupin does not stop James or Sirius from tormenting Snape. I will agree with this fact. But, does his inability to control Sirius and James make him evil? No. When Harry goes through Dolores Umbridge's Fire in 'Careers Advice' he finds Lupin and Sirius at Grimmauld Place. Lupin defends Harry's father by asking Harry not to judge what he saw in Snape's one memory. IF Lupin were ESE, would he really go out of his way to make this point? It would have to mean that James was also ESE!. Lupin would not defend the actions of James if he were ESE. It just doesn't make sense. An ESE person would revel in the humiliation of others. I am still not finding any evidence to ESE!Lupin. Lupin continues in this scene asking Sirius if he ever had the 'guts' to stop S&J from tormenting Snape. This says something of his character. Lupin was more noble and more mature than James and Sirius. However, he finally had friends. Rather than jeopardise his friendship, he stayed silent when J&S tormented Snape. Again, does it make him evil? No, it makes him human. He needed his friends. Lupin's values seem to be deeper at this age that Sirius and James. This does not make Lupin a Wormtail-esque character, IMHO, but someone who would sacrifice himself for those to whom he is loyal. This alone really wards off any ESE!Lupiun and Voldie!Lupin connections. Lupin needed his friends. He was loyal to them. He gave of himself and let go of his own convictions for his friends. This, in turn, many would say makes him weak and a target for LV. On the contrary, this does not. Lupin was bound by friendship to the Marauders. Much like Harry is bound by blood to Petunia. In the same chapter, we see Lupin somewhat, especially for him, enraged. He is very upset that Snape has refused further study of Occlumency to Harry, and rather than have a heated argument between Sirius and Snape, he stands up to speak to Snape. This makes perfect sense. Sirius and Snape cannot be in the same room without threatening to curse one another. Lupin, on the other hand, can keep his cool. Our next scene with Lupin in OoP has caused much suspicion. Lupin and Sirius with others from the Order arrive at the Ministry to save Harry. There is a great battle and Sirius falls behind the veil. Lupin explains to Harry that he is gone. I have read the theories. ESE!Lupin doesn't want Harry to find out what is behind the veil, etc. Rubbish, IMO. Let's take a look at the veil. Luna can hear the voices. So it is not just Harry. She knows that the dead are speaking. So, again, not just Harry. From what we know the veil, it is the veil between life and death. I think JKR does a fine job of setting this up, and speculation on it, is only that. We know Sirius cannot return from behind the veil. It is pretty much in canon. Lupin stopping Harry is Lupin keeping Harry from suicide. Prove this differently, and I will buy you a Firebolt-- that is until book six comes out . Lupin is saving Harry, as he has done before. No one seems to realise in the ESE!Lupin camp that Harry could not have made it through the Triwizard Tourney without Lupin's teachings. Lupin is a life saver for Harry. He loves and cares for Harry. In the battle with the DE's. there has been more speculation on ESE!Lupin and the prophecy. I agree with those that have said if ESE!Lupin were a reality, he would have endeavoured to save the prophecy, but if you look at the scene his main focus is saving Harry's bum. He is clearly not working for LV. There is much more to say on Lupin in theory, but most of what I have said tonight is in canon. Lupin is not ESE. He is our kind hearted, gentle, loving werewolf who defies stereotypes. This is important for children to learn. And, we as adults are endeavouring to read more into him that there is evidence for. Lupin is just one of those characters who is what he is. He has had his own demons to battle, but if he is ESE, I will eat a grindylow! I just don't buy it. -Tonks with a lot more to say on Lupin but sleep is needed. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 03:32:10 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 03:32:10 -0000 Subject: Sirius expendable? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85295 > > Carol: > > Sirius, though he's the title character in PoA, was deliberately > > misrepresented throughout that book and appeared in his proper > person > > only very near the end. He was a distant face and voice in GoF and > was > > present in OoP only in the Grimmauld Place chapters and in the DoM > > battle in which he was killed. He is not a major character to the > same > > degree as Ron or Hermione or for that matter Snape, who has grown > and > > developed through all the books as is as much a part of Hogwarts as > > Dumbledore. I do agree with your statement that only Ron's or > > Hermione's deaths would have hurt Harry more than Sirirus's. That > does > > not make him a major character, however, and he is clearly > expendable > > regardless of his popularity on this list and elsewhere. > Jen: I don't see how Sirius dying equals his character being > expendable. His major role in the story arc was to give us > information no other character could give. He and Pettigrew alone > held the valuable information that they switched as Secret Keepers, > and that Pettigrew was actually the spy. Without Black escaping > Azkaban, no one would ever be the wiser that Wormtail was alive and > living in Harry's dorm. Carol: Sorry to be unclear. I don't mean that the whole PoA plot was expendable--far from it--only that Sirius could die when his purpose was fulfilled without creating a huge hole in the story. As Snape unkindly pointed out, Sirius was stuck in Grimmauld Place unable to do anything significant for the Order. He was becoming more moody and reckless with every day spent in his mother's house with only Buckbeak and the egregious Kreacher for company. Certainly he was important to Harry and LV could use that importance to lure Harry into the DoM, and certainly the Harry we see in the next book will be different because of Sirius's death.But Sirius has now served his purpose and the series can go on without him. It would be much more difficult to continue without, say, Hermione, Dumbledore, or Snape, who seem to me to essential both to the plot and to Harry's development. (I do think Dumbledore will die in Book 7, to be succeeded by Headmistress McGonagall, but not yet. The real challenge will come when Harry and Hogwarts are no longer protected by the only wizard Voldemort fears.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 06:47:05 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 06:47:05 -0000 Subject: Endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85296 Marianne wrote: > > Harry will be the hero who vanishes from the world he saved, > > remaining behind only in story or myth. He'll no longer be > > part of the wizard world, but will never truly feel part of > > the muggle world, either. > > > > In a way, I'd be happy with the thought of Harry fading into > > Muggle obscurity, owning an eclectic book store located in a > > seedy part of town, that only stocks works on magic... I'd > > certainly be happier with that ending than with Harry completing > > his hero's journey by dying after he vanquishes the bad guy. At this point, I'm starting to long for the simple ending of Bilbo's "There and Back Again": "And he lived happily ever after, until the end of his days." Assuming that Harry's "days" aren't rudely interrupted by a spell from Voldemort, he should live happily for at least another 140 years. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 07:48:58 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 07:48:58 -0000 Subject: In Defence of Lupin ( very, very long) Part ONE In-Reply-To: <102.38f46c6d.2ceafc3f@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85297 -nymphadoraotonks wrote: I truly believe that Lupin is grateful for having Snape, who is skilled, even if he can be a great git, at Hogwarts to brew it for him. Harry's distrust of the situation is due out of his distrust for Snape. Lupin . . . knows that Snape loathes him. Now, whether he allows Harry to assume that Snape despises him for just being the DADA instructor to keep up appearances or because he was instructed to do so by DD to prevent the mayhem that ensues when he is discovered to be a werewolf is unknown. But, again, this 'deception' as many of the ESE!Lupin-ers would call it, isn't exactly deception in the way it would have to be for it to fit the ESE!Lupin theory. Is it deceptive for Lupin to allow Harry to assume that Snape's hatred is only based on the DADA position? Or, really, at this point is it any of Harry's business? Harry is a student. As a teacher, it would be improper for Lupin to speak negatively of his colleagues. It is neither here nor there in a teacher student relationship- which is the relationship that Lupin and Harry enjoy at this point in PoA- whether two teachers do or do not like one another or whether or not they have a sordid past. It is the job of the teacher to instruct to the best of his abilities, to support, and to nurture his students. So, to say that because Lupin does not reveal all the truths to Harry because he is ESE or untrustworthy is really just rubbish. It is not his place to do so, nor is it in any way proper. Carol responds: Thanks for you lengthy defense of Lupin, much of which I agree with (other than your view of Snape as "horrible"). I do want to mention, though, that Lupin's "deception" is only indirectly related to his relationship with Snape. What he's hiding is the secret Snape wants revealed: that he's a werewolf. He can't be expected to reveal that to Harry, but it's concealment, nonetheless. IMO both teachers are to be commended here, Lupin for his courtesy to Snape and Snape for the loyalty to Dumbledore that results in his making the potion despite his loathing of Lupin, which is partly personal but partly a very real concern for the Hogwarts students who unknowingly are in close proximity to a werewolf. Carol, who likes Snape but doesn't for a moment think Lupin is evil From seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 18 08:07:43 2003 From: seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk (seraphina_snape) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 08:07:43 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85298 Phil wrote: > OoP Chapter 'The Department of Mysteries' UK page 683 > > Harry and Luna hear voices from beyond the veil. > > If Harry hears a voice similar to Ron's, could it be the voice > of the often speculated 'missing Weasley' ? > A brother between Charlie + Bill --- gap --- and Percy. > Remember in GoF at Wizard World Cup, Arthur Weasley explains to the > youngsters the fear of coming home and finding the Dark Mark hovering > over your house. Arthur may have been talking from personal > experience. sera says: I think this would possibly explain why there is an age gap between the two oldest Weasleys and Percy. I always thought it was odd. I read some fanfics going for similiar explanations, and it made perfect sense. Molly far more than just worried after the Wrold Cup thing. Maybe she's afraid to see another child dead. From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 18 08:30:44 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 03:30:44 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85299 Hello justcarol67 at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? As for a Gryffindor betrayer, I don't think it's Percy, ? really, though he certainly shows that Gryffindors ? arent't perfect. So, in my view, do the Marauders. For ? those of us who place them in Gryffindor based on ? courage (reckless or otherwise) as their predominant ? trait, we already have a betraying Death Eater ? Gryffindor, Peter Pettigrew. As I said in my lengthy Lupin Defence posts, this is all speculation. But, I have also said on more than one occasion that Neville will show more power than we have ever believed him to have. WOuldn't it then be interesting if the boy whose parents were forced into fits of madness by LV, turned to the very man himself? THAT would be an interesting plot turn. ;) -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 18 08:35:39 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 03:35:39 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius expendable? Message-ID: <1ee.138e0d0e.2ceb33db@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85300 Hello justcarol67 at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? Carol: Sorry to be unclear. I don't mean that the whole ? PoA plot was expendable--far from it--only that Sirius ? could die when his purpose was fulfilled without ? creating a huge hole in the story. As Snape unkindly ? pointed out, Sirius was stuck in Grimmauld Place ? unable to do anything significant for the Order. He was ? becoming more moody and reckless with every day ? spent in his mother's house with only Buckbeak and ? the egregious Kreacher for company. Certainly he was ? important to Harry and LV could use that importance to ? lure Harry into the DoM, and certainly the Harry we see ? in the next book will be different because of Sirius's ? death.But Sirius has now served his purpose and the ? series can go on without him. It would be much more ? difficult to continue without, say, Hermione, ? Dumbledore, or Snape, who seem to me to essential ? both to the plot and to Harry's development. (I do think ? Dumbledore will die in Book 7, to be succeeded by ? Headmistress McGonagall, but not yet. The real ? challenge will come when Harry and Hogwarts are no ? longer protected by the only wizard Voldemort fears.) Carol, I think this may be the first time I have truly disagreed with you. I do not think that Sirius has shown himself for the last time. The veil is too mysterious for that. Lupin, and please no one start with the ESE!Lupin theories, tolf Harry that Sirius was gone as he prevented him from jumping inot/behind the veil. I *do not* think that this means he is gone from us forever. Yet, I also do not believe, as stated in previous posts, that he will return as a ghost. His death is too mysterious, even for JKR. Sirius still has a purpose, IMHO. And, I think we will see something of him to come. -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 18 08:38:58 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 03:38:58 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: In Defence of Lupin ( very, very long) Part ONE Message-ID: <7b.1cd1d572.2ceb34a2@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85301 Hello justcarol67 at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? Thanks for you lengthy defense of Lupin, much of ? which I agree with (other than your view of Snape as ? "horrible"). I do want to mention, though, that Lupin's ? "deception" is only indirectly related to his relationship ? with Snape. What he's hiding is the secret Snape ? wants revealed: that he's a werewolf. He can't be ? expected to reveal that to Harry, but it's concealment, ? nonetheless. IMO both teachers are to be commended ? here, Lupin for his courtesy to Snape and Snape for the ? loyalty to Dumbledore that results in his making the ? potion despite his loathing of Lupin, which is partly ? personal but partly a very real concern for the Hogwarts ? students who unknowingly are in close proximity to a ? werewolf. Carol, who likes Snape but doesn't for a ? moment think Lupin is evil Carol, LOL! You must know by now that my description of Snape as 'Horrible' was to illustrate a point. Good lord! Both as 'Snuffles" and 'Tonks' in my time on this list, I have defended Snape as an abused child. ( We'll get on to THAT defence some other night ) I think I am one of the few who decribes Snape as Sexy! and that is before the films tainted my brains with images of Alan Rickman running through my head. There is a LOT to Snape. And just in the one instance, he was being horrible. Does he have a defence? YES!. -Tonks, eagerly wanting to get on the Snape defence but needing sleep! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 18 08:45:41 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 03:45:41 EST Subject: To clarify. Message-ID: <10f.28ca07cb.2ceb3635@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85302 Carol brought up an interesting point and I want to address it before I fall down from sleep deprivation. I do NOT think Snape is horrible. I stand by all my assessments of Snape in the past. I love Snape. I have called him many things. ( He will always be Sexy Snape to me) Tomorrow after some sleep, I will continue in defence os my favourite characters with canon, i.e. I will take on the huge task of defending Severus Snape, whom I believe to be an angel in disguise. When I referred to him as 'Horrible', he was being horrible, and it was only to illustrate a point. I LOVE snape. -Tonks, who is wildly sleepy. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 08:13:33 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 08:13:33 -0000 Subject: Mister Figg....? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85303 "sand000d" wrote: > What I was thinking is, Arabella Figg uses the title Mrs. implying, > obviously, that she is/was married. Now Mr. Figg may have been a > muggle or another squib or maybe a wizard, who knows? But the fact > that Mrs. Figg is a squib implies that she comes from wizarding > blood. Is there ever any talk of what he maiden name is? Is this > important at all or am I just taking things too far? Carol: At Harry's hearing (OoP 142, Am. edition), she gives her full name as Arabella Doreen Figg. Either she omits her maiden name or she was never really married and "Mrs." is only part of her disguise as a muggle, since muggles tend to expect older women to have been married at some point. "Miss Figg" would sound odd at her time of life. OTOH, if Figg is her late husband's last name and he was a muggle, the fact that the MoM had never heard of her makes more sense than having it just lose track of her because she's a squib. Maybe if she'd given her maiden name along with her married name at the hearing, she'd have been recognized as part of a wizarding family. So I think you're right that Figg is a muggle name. That's all I can come up with at this point. Hope it helps. Carol From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 09:15:08 2003 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:15:08 -0000 Subject: Simultaneous Worldwide Publication? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85304 "Steve" wrote: > Currently there is a thread 'What if Harry dies?', and an aspect of > this has been the speculation that if word got out of Harry's death > in the last book, people would refuse to buy it, and the publishers > would refuse to print it. > > Readers refuse to buy- > > I don't think that is true. (snip) > We don't watch for the ending because we know it, we watch for the > story. I couldn't agree more. Let's take the new Star Wars trilogy, for example. We all know that by the end of the 3rd episode, Anakin will have turned completely to the Dark Side, which in my idea is almost worse than being dead. So, even if I personally didn't like the first 2 episodes that much, I am waiting *very* impatiently for the 3rd one, just to know how this is going to happen. And btw, I wouldn't be overly sad if Harry did die in the end. I never truly connected with him, and he annoys me quite often (and, well, I really don't like it when I feel forced to have pity or compassion on someone). I would be much more bothered with Hermione's, Neville's or Remus's death. > Publishers refuse to publish- > (snip) > So, whether they like it or not, the publishers will publish. Hum, excuse me, but... LOL ! Now, that would be worth seeing, a publisher refusing to publish a Harry Potter book just because they don't like the ending :-) I mean, those books are heavenly manna for the publishers and the demand for them is outstanding. After all, did we hear of any publisher who refused to publish OoP just because their favourite character, namely Sirius, died in it ? > Distribution Dilemma - > > We know all the secrecy that occurred during the release of the > latest book. I wonder how JKR is going to handle the release of the > seventh book? > > If she does an English version release before the foreign language > releases, for a vast majority of the world, the 'secret' will be out > long before their books are even printed. Huh, let me guess : you live in an English-speaking country, and you always get the Hollywood's movies right when they come out in the States, right ? Because if you lived in, say, France (like me, for example ;-), you'd know that : a) unless you look for it, the probability is you won't learn of the surprise ending. I remember watching a special premiere of "The Sixth Sense" more than a month before it officially came out in France, and I felt horrible at the end of it, because I felt it would be nearly impossible to hold my tongue about the surprise end. But the truth is, nobody cared about the movie until it came out in France. It was a big thing in many other parts of the world, but here nobody cared about it until we had it too. So what I mean is that unless a French HP fan really goes out of his way to find out about the end of the 7th book, he probably won't find out about it until it is published in French (or until he buys an English version ;-) b) Knowing the end doesn't kill the interest in a book. See above my comments about "readers refuse to buy". Many people out here in France have heard many things about OoP, but they still can't wait to get their hands on it when it comes out in French. > And what will the level of secrecy be on this last book? It will > have to be on the order of magnitude of the governments top defense > secrets; right up there with the governments knowledge of UFOs. I personally wouldn't have any problems with knowing beforehand how things are going to end. In fact, *hum hum* (embarassed coughs), I have the very bad habit of reading the beginning of a book, and then jump right at the end of it. I just love to see how much a situation has changed, and to wonder as to *how ever* things got from this to that ? So I knew quite early on when reading OoP that Sirius was the one who was going to die, but it didn't take any interest away from reading the whole book. > Reader's Dilemma - > > If JKR self-publishes and/or the book is released simultaneously in > all major languages, I can see that addinga year or possibly more to > the publication time of the book. Book 7 could be 10 year away, I > don't know if I can hold out for that long. Oh yes, you can :-) The only thing that might happen is that when the last book finally comes out, you'll have dropped out of your HP frenzy, and it will become a bore to read it. But considering the sheer intrinsic quality of the books, I think it quite unlikely :-) > The Secret - > > Unless there is a substantial drop in the general popularity of the > HP books, the demand to know what happened is going to be > hysterically overwhelming. I can't imagine how they are going to > keep it a secret. Bah. Strangely enough, when I finished GoF, I just couldn't wait for the next book. But this time I couldn't care less when number 6 will come out. So maybe I won't care that much about number 7 either. It would take *very* unsettling revelations in book 6 to make me crave like mad for book 7. Which I don't put past JKR's talent, of course ;- ) Del From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 18 10:02:29 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:02:29 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85305 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > > But we do know why he chose Harry rather than Neville. Dumbledore's > words in OoP: "He saw himself in you before he had even seen you." > > Berit Yes, DD does say this; but how does he *know*? Or is he guessing? (A bit of post fact rationalising, perhaps?) IMO Voldy went after Harry because he could. With Pettigrew feeding him information he probably saw Harry as a sitting duck. It was his attack that turned Harry into his supposed nemesis, it was the attack that gave Harry his powers, both from Lily and from Voldemort. If he had attacked Neville instead we would be reading 'Neville Longbottom and the Thingy of Whatsit'. And what of himself would Voldy see in Harry? Some Muggle blood. Not exactly mindblowing, is it? Unless, of course, DD is referring to some other connection between the two that is yet to be revealed. Something the Paranoid League of Conspiracy Theorists have been wondering about. That could be a whole new cauldron of flobberworms. Kneasy From belijako at online.no Tue Nov 18 10:14:32 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:14:32 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85306 Carol wrote: But what's extremely odd is that the eye colors and wand light colors are opposite. In other words, Voldemort has red eyes but the light from his wand is green, matching Tom Riddle's old house: Slytherin. Harry has green eyes but the light from his wand is red, matching the scarlet of Gryffindor. What on earth does it mean? It can't be that green (Slytherin) = evil and red or scarlet (Gryffindor) = good. That's too simplistic and the eyes suggest the exact opposite (though of course Slytherin = good and and Gryffindor = evil is even more absurd). The union of the houses? The end of rivalry and division at Hogwarts? Is gold associated with Fawkes the Phoenix? The only thing I can think of now that's golden is the snitch, and that leads us exactly nowhere. Me: I don't know if you have noticed that the colours of the Golden Snitch are those of the Gryffindor and Slytherin houses...? The "body" of the Snitch is golden, yes, but its wings are... silver :-) The Scnitch is a perfect unity of the Gryffindor and Slytherin colours... I don't know if that leads us anywhere :-)) P.S: I don't know if it is Fawkes that originally gave the Gryffindor house its gold and red colours, but I am sure golden-red Fawkes and the house are connected. Personally I think Rowling's use of colours often means something. What exactly, I'm not sure :-) Has anyone noticed her use of colours in the silver instrument scene in OoP? The one where a SILVER instrument issues GREEN smoke from which a SNAKE arises. And a few sentences later (still in the same scene) Rowling repeats these "clues" when Dumbledore walks over to the portrait of Phineas Nigellus to ask him to alert Sirius in Grimmauld Place: Rowling describes Phineas as being painted in the Slytherin colours of GREEN and SILVER, and she makes Dumbledore call his name twice to arouse him: "Phineas, PHINEAS" (capital letters are written in italics in the book)... We have reason to believe the name "Phineas" means "SERPENT's mouth"... :-) This scene has intrigued me for a while, and I've filled a few pages with notes. Maybe I'll share it with you guys sometime :-) By the way, later in OoP, Harry tries to flee Grimmauld Place because he fears he'll kill or injure his friends believing he is possessed by the "snake" Voldemort, when Phineas stops him with a message from Dumbledore telling Harry to stay. When Harry realises he doesn't get to know why he has to stay, he loses his temper. Rowling's description of his emotions: "It was like a snake rearing out of tall grass," or something to that effect. Well, what's the colour of grass? :-) Berit http://home.no.net/berjakob/snape.html From florentinemaier at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 10:16:36 2003 From: florentinemaier at hotmail.com (Florentine Maier) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:16:36 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85307 Sydney (84770) has inspired me to a new (at least as far as I know) theory on the jinx that has allegedly been put on the post of the DADA-teacher. I presume that it's not just a rumor but that the post is actually jinxed. I think the jinx could go something like that: "Everybody who takes the job of DADA-teacher will come to grief because of his/her greatest weakness within a year." Cases in point: Quirrell: Weak will Lockhard: Vanity Lupin: Being a werewolf Moody: Paranoia Umbridge: Imperiousness Go ahead, criticize my theory, for the sake of progress of Potterology! Florentine From belijako at online.no Tue Nov 18 10:24:30 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:24:30 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85308 Kneasy wrote: And what of himself would Voldy see in Harry? Some Muggle blood. Not exactly mindblowing, is it? Unless, of course, DD is referring to some other connection between the two that is yet to be revealed. Something the Paranoid League of Conspiracy Theorists have been wondering about. That could be a whole new cauldron of flobberworms. Me: I don't know if I consider myself belonging to the Paranoid League of Conspiracy Theorists (unless I can find evidence/clues in canon to pursue such a path :-) But let me just reply to your question of whether there is a bigger connection between Voldemort and Harry than just the Muggle blood. I think Rowling is carefully hinting there are. Remember Tom Riddle's little speech at the end of CoS: "There are strange likenesses between us, Harry...". By that he seems to mean their physical appearance/looks, their background (orphans etc.), and their abilities (parseltongue). I have a hunch Rowling has more "strange likenesses" up her sleeve :-) Berit http://home.no.net/berjakob/snape.html From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 18 10:43:21 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:43:21 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85309 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > > I don't know if I consider myself belonging to the Paranoid League of > Conspiracy Theorists (unless I can find evidence/clues in canon to > pursue such a path :-) But let me just reply to your question of > whether there is a bigger connection between Voldemort and Harry than > just the Muggle blood. I think Rowling is carefully hinting there > are. Remember Tom Riddle's little speech at the end of CoS: "There > are strange likenesses between us, Harry...". By that he seems to > mean their physical appearance/looks, their background (orphans > etc.), and their abilities (parseltongue). I have a hunch Rowling has > more "strange likenesses" up her sleeve :-) > > Berit Hmm. Looks? May be significant; but background (orphans) and powers such as parseltongue were not innate in Harry until Voldy turned up at the Potter's front door with an offer they felt able to refuse. This idea that Voldy went after Harry because of his Muggle blood. My devious mind can see a wonderful potential for mis-direction - what if the Muggle blood in question is not a general antipathy (though we know that Voldy has that anyway), but that in this particular instance it is because of a particular line of Muggle blood? Maybe linking Harry and Voldy? I don't claim perfect vision on this thing, but the way JKR has emphasised bloodlines and unlikely links does make me wonder; is she at it again? Kneasy who thinks Berit can be seduced to the Dark Side of Theorising From belijako at online.no Tue Nov 18 10:55:07 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:55:07 -0000 Subject: Replay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85310 Kneasy wrote: Hmm. Looks? May be significant... This idea that Voldy went after Harry because of his Muggle blood. My devious mind can see a wonderful potential for mis-direction - what if the Muggle blood in question is not a general antipathy (though we know that Voldy has that anyway), but that in this particular instance it is because of a particular line of Muggle blood? Maybe linking Harry and Voldy? Kneasy who thinks Berit can be seduced to the Dark Side of Theorising Me: I'm with you Kneasy! Maybe Voldemort was more interested in Harry than Neville because of a particular line of Muggle blood... I am, as you see, easily seduced :-) Berit From laura.carberry at aintitcoolmail.com Tue Nov 18 13:22:37 2003 From: laura.carberry at aintitcoolmail.com (laura) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:22:37 -0000 Subject: James, Lupin, and the Head Boy Badge (was: More Questions.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85311 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: *snipped*> > Ffi responded: > I'm sorry if I've missed this question being answered at some point, > but there's one thing that confuses me. Back in PS, hagrid said > harry's parents were head boy and girl in their time, but in OofP, > sirius says James wasn't a prefect - so can non-prefects become head > boy? It is usually a continuation - head b/g chosen from the 6 > prefects in the last year of school. > > Ffi > > Carol again: > This seeming inconsistency is the reason I think that the Head Boy and > Head Girl are automatically assigned based on marks (grades) > regardless of whether these people have previously been appointed as > Prefects. My solution would also explain how the Head Boy and Head > Girl could be from the same house (Gryffindor) in Lily and James's > last year and how James could be Head Boy without having been a > Prefect. > > Most Head Boys and Head Girls have previously been Prefects simply > because high marks are one of the criteria for choosing a Prefect, but > there are other reasons as well. (Consider the factors that must have > gone into the decision to appoint Ron rather than Harry as Gryffundor > Prefect in their fifth year.) Also, since more than one boy or girl in > a house may be excellent students (e.g., James, Sirius, and Remus), > the one chosen as Prefect may not necessarily have the highest marks. > In my view, Remus was chosen as Prefect even though his friends' marks > were probably higher, but James became Head Boy because his marks were > higher than those of any male student in his year. The fact that he > was never a Prefect is irrelevant. > > At any rate, it seems that the criteria for choosing a Prefect are > flexible, and I imagine that the Heads of Houses have a say in the > matter even though the final decision is Dumbledore's. But Head Boy > and Head Girl have nothing to do with Houses or previous status as > Prefect. As far as I can see, they are honors based solely on academic > performance. This is just my theory, of course. There may be some > other explanation. > > I predict that in Book 7, the Head Boy and Head Girl will be Hermione > and Ernie MacMillan (I can't imagine Ron as Head Boy unless his marks > improve dramatically). But if Harry's grades are higher than Ernie's, > he'll be Head Boy even though he was never a Prefect--unless some > Ravenclaw outperforms him academically. (I'm voting for Ernie. Harry > has enough to deal with already.) > > Carol now lola The reason I think Harry will be head boy has very little to do with grades. It is pretty obvious that Voldie-war 2 will come to a head in Harry's seventh year, it has to. In that seventh year the school is going to need a strong leader. Dumbledore is not going to be around ( I predict that Lord Thingy is going to try to take Hogwarts in book 6, and that Dumbledore will die heroically, but thats another post). I can't really see any of the other teachers truly taking his place Harry has already proven his mettle as a leader, with the DA. More importantly, people will follow him - despite intelligent objections, Hermionie did follow Harry to the MoM in OOP. Furthermore, Harry is the leader of the student 'light side:' the entire school already knows what side he is on. They also know that he is a powerful wizard via the numerous speeches Dumbledore has mentioned him in. (If)When Hogwarts is attacked, I feel that Harry will become something of a 'rallying point' for the students. I don't believe that Ernie McMillan (really the only other choice - can you imagine Draco as head boy!?) has the same effect on people. While he would certainly be an excellent administrative head boy, that is not what is going to be required in book 7. lola xxx From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 18 13:53:23 2003 From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:53:23 -0000 Subject: Red and Green and Gold and Silver:(Was: Harry's green eyes) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85312 Carol wrote: >> But what's extremely odd is that the eye colors and wand light colors are opposite. In other words, Voldemort has red eyes but the light from his wand is green, matching Tom Riddle's old house: Slytherin. Harry has green eyes but the light from his wand is red, matching the scarlet of Gryffindor. What on earth does it mean? It can't be that green (Slytherin) = evil and red or scarlet (Gryffindor) = good. The union of the houses? The end of rivalry and division at Hogwarts? Is gold associated with Fawkes the Phoenix? >> Well, Harry's jet of light is red because it comes from the Expelliarumus spell, whereas Voldemort's is green because it's an Avada Kedavra. Harry's earliest memory: jets of green light=bad. Then he gets to Hogwarts where green = Slytherin = Draco = enemy. I don't know if we have it anywhere else in canon that Expelliarumus is a red jet though - we know that Stupefy is. Someone flag down a passing L.O.O.N? I wonder if the significance of Harry and Voldemort having their opposite number's eye colour has something to do with that old "In Essence Divided" malarky which I see Berit has flagged up in response to this post - linked because each of them has a little of the other in them. Lily Potter, too, with her red hair and green eyes, connects them. (NB - none of the Weasleys are mentioned as having green eyes) Certainly gold=Fawkes in this instance - it occurs along with the phoenix song because the wand cores come from him. Phoenix rebirth as good, though? Rising from the ashes is precisely what Voldemort does in this scene and is obsessed with. Berit wrote: > Personally I think Rowling's use of colours often means something. What exactly, I'm not sure :-) Has anyone noticed her use of colours in the silver instrument scene in OoP? The one where a SILVER instrument issues GREEN smoke from which a SNAKE arises.> Silver is also the colour of the Patronus. There's one other silver spell I'm interested in too: ****** Dumbledore flicked his own wand: the force of the spell that emanated from it was such that Harry, though shielded by his *golden guard*, felt his hair stand on endas it passed, and this time Voldemort was forced to conjure a shining silver shield out of thin air to deflect it. The spell, whatever it was, caused no visible damage to the shield, though a deep, gong-like note reverberated from it - and oddly chilling sound. 'You do not seek to kill me, Dumbledore?' called Voldemort, his scarlet eyes narrowed over the top of his shield. 'Above such brutality, are you?' 'We both know there are other ways of destroyng a man, Tom,' Dumbledore said...'Merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit -' 'There is nothing worse than death, Dumbledore!' snarled Voldemort. 'You are quite wrong,' said Dumbledore... ****** OoP, Bloomsbury, p718. Emphasis and ellipsis my own. Voldemort knows something we don't here - that this spell (whatever it is) couldn't kill him. However, the force of description by which it is rendered suggests that this particular spell is that thing worse than death which Voldemort is in denial of. His denial is preserved by the physical manifestation of a silver shield, and this silver shield is very different to Harry's "golden guard" (the headless statue). So, if the phoenix gold has something to do with rebirth/revitalisation, silver seems to be the colour of protection and possibly denial. It makes the Dementors (depression, confronting one's worst fears) disappear (as someone noted today, it doesn't *destroy* them, just sends them on the run for a while. Patronus as wizarding Prozac, anyone?), and it protects Voldemort from this thing worse than death, which he fears but will not admit to. Kirstini, absolutely unable to draw any further conclusions! From IrishMastermind at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 10:10:44 2003 From: IrishMastermind at hotmail.com (Anne Geldermann) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:10:44 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Case for Lupin Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85313 > > >What if Voldie and the DEs know what's beyond the veil, >and it's something Harry Potter must not see? What if Voldemort just >wanted Harry alive for another reason? (I know he tried to get DD to >kill Harry in OotP, but I don't think that was really in earnest. >Tom Riddle knows DD well enough that he knew the man wouldn't kill >Harry.) There could be any number of reasons for an Evil!Lupin to >want to keep Harry from sprinting toward the dais.< > >KathyK: > >Evil!Lupin had no choice but to stop Harry regardless of Voldemort's >plans for him as Dumbledore was right there watching Sirius go >through the archway. Even if Dumbledore didn't see where Harry was, >he did turn toward the dais as Sirius fell through and might have >noticed Harry hurtling toward the archway. Dumbledore would have >stopped Harry, I believe, and then might have wondered why Lupin, >who was right by Harry, didn't stop him. > So what is to stop Lupin, if he is evil, from trying to grab Harry a split second too slowly and losing his grip as Harry hurtled by? Harry was fighting as hard as he could to get to the dais. All ESE!Lupin would then have to do would act incredibly horrified and guilty. Besides, Sirius is his best friend. It would certainly be reasonable to accept that his reflexes were slowed by the shock of getting Sirius, the last of his three school friends, back after so many years and then losing him again so relatively soon. If he is really evil, the fact that he has been able to make everyone think of him as gentle and kind is proof that this would be an easy act for him to put on. As for the argument that Lupin was the one that killed Sirius, I can't buy it. If Harry was hurtling, I don't see how ESE!Lupin would have time to: 1) Make sure Dumbledore was looking away from him, as was everyone else in the room. 2) Zap Sirius in the split second he did this, which would be rather difficult to do as someone may have changed the direction they were looking in at the same time. And people were looking Sirius' and Bellatrix's way. He would have to be directly behind Bellatrix, both for the angle to look right and for Sirius to see this. 3) See Harry running past him to the dais (and if he was running past him, he'd be coming from behind since Lupin would still be facing the dais. 4) Look around and see that Dumbledore was turning around, and 5) Be able to catch Harry and hold him back. 1 and 2 would have to be almost instantaneous, as would 3, 4, and 5. Anne _________________________________________________________________ Frustrated with dial-up? Get high-speed for as low as $26.95. https://broadband.msn.com (Prices may vary by service area.) From sylviablundell at aol.com Tue Nov 18 14:04:14 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:04:14 -0000 Subject: Mister Figg....? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85314 Carol wrote: >At Harry's hearing, she gives her full name as Arabella Doreen Figg. Either she omits her maiden name or she was never really married. Now me: This doesn't follow. Although I believe it is customary for American women to use their maiden names as well as their current surnames on formal occasions, this is not true in England. Mrs. Figg, giving evidence in an English court, would give only her Christian name, middle names (if any) and her surname. Her maiden name is irrelevant. I would agree that, if there ever was a Mr. Figg, he hasn't been around for some time. She gives the impression of having lived for a long while on her own. Mr. Figg, if he ever existed, is either dead or has legged it long ago. Perhaps he couldn't stand all those cats. Sylvia (who quite likes cats, in spite of being currently in the dog- house with Inga) From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 18 11:35:42 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:35:42 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85315 I think I was getting tired when I wrote message 85267 last night, because on re-reading it this morning, I realised that I had missed out on what I intended to be the centre of the message. It was my intention to comment on the end of "The Last Battle", to which Mirror of Erised made reference. In that book, the three children who have retained their links to Narnia come back and are with Aslan when he brings that world to an end. They go through the stable door, meet their parents and realise that they have all been killed in a train crash and this is the afterlife. Two points. First, as I said, Narnia is very much a children's allegory for the Christian faith. At the end of "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader", Aslan appears as a lamb which is the great Christian symbol of the risen Christ in the book of Revelation. Here at the very end of the story, we are told that he no longer looks like a lion and for the children "it was only the beginning of the real story." My second point, which is more germane to Harry, is that, in "The Last Battle", the characters' POV goes over with them into the new heaven. As I said a day or so ago, if Harry dies, then there has to be an awkward shift in the POV at this point. If it were to happen then whether we switch to an authorial/narrative view would have to be seen. I realise that there are books where the leading character dies and the point of view is carried up to that point ("A Tale of Two Cities" comes to mind) but the narrative stops there. For Harry to die and the book come to a full stop seems to be unlikely; it would be too abrupt and would lack a full closure. Geoff From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 18 11:48:10 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:48:10 -0000 Subject: Mister Figg....? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85316 > > What I was thinking is, Arabella Figg uses the title Mrs. implying, > > obviously, that she is/was married. Now Mr. Figg may have been a > > muggle or another squib or maybe a wizard, who knows? But the fact > > that Mrs. Figg is a squib implies that she comes from wizarding > > blood. Is there ever any talk of what he maiden name is? Is this > > important at all or am I just taking things too far? Carol: > At Harry's hearing (OoP 142, Am. edition), she gives her full name as > Arabella Doreen Figg. Either she omits her maiden name or she was > never really married and "Mrs." is only part of her disguise as a > muggle, since muggles tend to expect older women to have been married > at some point. "Miss Figg" would sound odd at her time of life. > Geoff: Sorry, but why would this seem odd to Muggles at her time of life? There are many older women who have never married and are "Miss". The church to wihch I belong has a good smattering of them. I must admit though that I always visualise Arabella Figg as a spinster from JKR's description -despite the Mrs. She reminds me so very much of a similar description in a "real life" novel which is one of my favourite "To serve them all my days" by R.F.Delderfield - which curiously is about life in a boys' public boarding school. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 14:22:24 2003 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:22:24 -0000 Subject: I *love* tragic endings ! (Was : Re: What if Harry dies?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85317 "susanbones2003" wrote: > I realize this might well be considered a provencial point of view, > but if Harry dies, if the ending is not simply bittersweet with the > loss of many important characters, but if the ending should require > the death of Harry, would the series be something we would want to > read and re-read even into future generations? It would be gutsy to > to kill Harry but I wouldn't want it to be gutsy for the sake of > guts. Harry's death would break untold hearts, and disaffect them > as well. A "happy ending" isn't necessary but a satisfactory one > is. I am very hopeful JKR will want Harry to triumph over Lord > Voldemort and live to tell the tale. > Jennifer There seems to be quite a few people out there who share Jennifer's opinion that JKR "can't" kill Harry, that it somehow wouldn't be "nice" or "fair" to her young readers. I just don't understand. When I was a kid, I simply LOVED it when the/a main character died at the end of a book ! It made the book (or the series of books) so much more precious : there was only that much of that character, there was *never* going to be any more of them, so I made sure I read and re-read the books and enjoyed every line of it. Moreover, it seemed quite unnatural to me to see a character live a great deal of their life in Hell, and quite suddenly end up in Heaven for the rest of their life. They go through so much hardship and heartache and whatnot, but in the end they just get married and live happily ever after. It always felt wrong to me, even as a kid, because I knew deep down that life is just not like that. In real life, you don't suddenly reach the end of your problems forever. And most of all, you don't overcome all your past traumas in the blink of an eye. That's why I also loved the endings that showed the/a main character living a misfit's life at least for a while as a result of their past trauma. So honestly, if I were a kid now and I found out that Harry dies at the end of Book 7, I wouldn't feel betrayed or whatever. I'd be sorry for him that he never got to have some good life (without LV on his back, that is), but that's it. On the other hand, if I discovered that Harry kills LV, the WW reforms itself, Harry gets the girl (whichever :-), and lives happily and normally ever after, now *that* would make me sick, because it's just not real in my idea. I think we as adults tend to project our own fears on our kids. But honestly, quite a few kids accept death as a normal part of life. They get sad when someone they love dies, they might be angry or bitter for a while, but most of them will get over it and come to treasure the memories of that person. It is mostly the *separation* from that person that is hard on them. And when it comes to a book character whose author has made it quite clear that no matter the ending, there won't be any more books about him, well, the separation is going to be there anyway, whether Harry dies or not. Del From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 18 14:27:14 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:27:14 +0000 Subject: Reflections On That Mirror Message-ID: <4DF20021-19D3-11D8-8871-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85318 I've been reading, or rather re-reading PS again and having further thoughts about the Mirror - the Erised job. I'm beginning to suspect that everything is not quite as advertised by Dumbledore. Yes, I know. I can hear the collective sigh from here - "He's at it again, stirring things up. Can't he leave us in peace?" Er, no. At the end of PS / SS DD is doing what is now accepted as the traditional final explication; filling in the gaps, dotting the 'i's and crossing the 't's. "I'm glad you asked me that. It was one of my more brilliant ideas, and between you and me, that's saying something. You see, only one who wanted to *find* the Stone - find it, but not use it - would be able to get it, otherwise they'd just see themselves making gold or drinking Elixir of Life. But no more questions." Ah, excuse me, but wasn't that what Quirrell was up to? Finding the Stone? He had no intention of using it - "I see the Stone...I'm presenting it to my master...but where is it?" Go further back. The Mirror is supposed to show your desires, not knowledge or truth. So says DD. Ron stood in front of the Mirror and sees himself as Head Boy, Head of Quidditch and holding the Quidditch Cup. Oh, how we laughed! Ron is now a Prefect and a Quidditch hero, with still two years to go at school. Hello? Anyone getting a strange feeling about this? Harry sees family - at least ten others besides himself. He sees his parents, he sees other pairs of green eyes, he sees noses like his and a little old man who might have his knobbly knees. Noses? Knobbly knees? Has Harry's nose ever been described? If it has I can't find it. But apparently it's distinctive enough to be recognised. The only nose I can remember is Snape's. Great beaked thing. You don't think...? Surely not. Knobbly knees - how about those? Not really. Closest is a scrawny boy on a bucking broomstick in one of Snape's memories and another scrawny newcomer that gets a mention. Not close enough. Ron looked in the Mirror with future desires foremost. He saw what he wanted to happen. The Mirror guarantees nothing, but there is no reason why wishes shouldn't come true despite that. Harry looks and desires the past. He sees his family; maternal mudblood and paternal pureblood. Would the Mirror show people that had never existed? Unlikely. No point. So James did (does) have a family. Who and where? And since purebloods are such a tight, small, intermarried group why didn't Sirius point out a few of the Potters among all the generations on the Black tapestry? Maybe a few were there. But as I've posted before, Potter is such an odd name for a pureblood; almost unreal. But the Mirror. Can't help feeling Harry missed a trick there. Wouldn't it be natural for him to ask DD who all those people were? Once again we are relying on DD for the facts. His most significant utterance was probably "But no more questions." Pity. I've got lots. Kneasy From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Tue Nov 18 14:31:04 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:31:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: What if Harry dies? References: Message-ID: <000801c3ade0$98d7b9a0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85319 We've been discussing whether Harry should die or not, but I think I have a slightly different reason for wanting Harry to live. First, let's imagine we have just finished reading the 7th book. No matter how great or exciting or fulfilling it may be, I ,for one, will certainly feel depressed. All questions should be answered (well major ones anyway). There will be no more clues to uncover and dissect and theorize endlessly. It will be the end of an enjoyable part of my life. Now, if we get Dead Harry, we won't even get to imagine his future. I want to be able to speculate and imagine and fantasize about Harry's future, based on clues from the epilogue. Fan-fictions wont be so fun without Harry, or "let's pretend he didn't die" theories or ghost Harry stories. What will all us Harry Potter freaks do with our free time? It would be so final, so finished, so depressing. I want Harry to live on and on and on..... Joj [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 14:58:18 2003 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:58:18 -0000 Subject: Reflections On That Mirror In-Reply-To: <4DF20021-19D3-11D8-8871-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85320 B Arrowsmith wrote: (snip) > Ah, excuse me, but wasn't that what Quirrell was up to? Finding the > Stone? He had no intention of using it - "I see the Stone...I'm > presenting it to my master...but where is it?" Good one. I guess DD would argue that giving it to LV was already using the Stone. Harry, on the other hand, just saw himself pocketing the Stone. He didn't intend to do *anything* with it. > Go further back. The Mirror is supposed to show your desires, not > knowledge or truth. So says DD. > > Ron stood in front of the Mirror and sees himself as Head Boy, > Head of Quidditch and holding the Quidditch Cup. > > Oh, how we laughed! > > Ron is now a Prefect and a Quidditch hero, with still two years to > go at school. Hello? Anyone getting a strange feeling about this? Nah :-) For me, it only illustrates that one can start with the worst odds against him, and still fulfill his dreams, out of hard work and perseverance (and a bit of luck :-). Ron decided to try the tryouts, he practiced for a whole week, he endured his brothers' taunts, in other words he took his chance. As for being a Prefect, well he did have 1 chance in 5, right ? > Harry sees family - at least ten others besides himself. He sees > his parents, he sees other pairs of green eyes, he sees noses like > his and a little old man who might have his knobbly knees. > > Noses? Knobbly knees? Has Harry's nose ever been described? If it > has I can't find it. But apparently it's distinctive enough to be > recognised. The only nose I can remember is Snape's. Great beaked > thing. You don't think...? Surely not. I don't remember Harry's nose being described, but I seem to remember that James-in-Snape's-Pensieve's nose is described as being different from Harry's. So that would mean that either Harry has his mother's nose or that this characteristic skipped one or more generations on his father's side. As for Snape's nose... Well, well, well... ;-) > Knobbly knees - how about those? Not really. Closest is a scrawny > boy on a bucking broomstick in one of Snape's memories and another > scrawny newcomer that gets a mention. Not close enough. Sooo... Let's see. The green eyes are on his mom's side. The knobbly knees are neutral for now. That leaves the nose. If the nose is from his mom's side too, that might very well mean that Harry saw only people from his mom's family in that mirror (apart from his dad, of course). That could be interesting, don't you think ? (snip) > So James did (does) have a family. Who and where? And since > purebloods are such a tight, small, intermarried group > why didn't Sirius point out a few of the Potters among all the > generations on the Black tapestry? Maybe a few were there. But as > I've posted before, Potter is such an odd name for a pureblood; > almost unreal. Yup, couldn't agree more. Something is awfully weird here. Harry doesn't ask about his grand-parents (on either side). Noone mentions them to him, except Sirius once but he doesn't go into details and Harry doesn't ask. And the Potters don't show up on that tapestry, or at least Sirius doesn't mention them (if so, why ?). Something's up, definitely. > But the Mirror. Can't help feeling Harry missed a trick there. Could be. Just like I feel he should re-open that photo book of his. He might be up for nasty surprises. For all we know, the name Tom Riddle might even appear on some old family picture (nobody except for DD, Harry and dearly few others know that's LV's real name after all). Del From rredordead at aol.com Tue Nov 18 15:10:21 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:10:21 -0000 Subject: Percey Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85321 ~Kate wrote: > Would it not be more useful to Lucius and, by extension, Voldemort if Percy, under the Imperius Curse, gave information about strategies the good guys were using to combat Voldie et al? Snip Mandy again: Not if Voldemort already has a mole in the Order, which I think he does. Percy is very susceptible to the Curse in my opinion. He feels obliged to always do the right thing, follow orders, be a good boy and is very impressed by those in charge. He perfectly ripe for plucking and if Lucius was in need of a mole or two at the Ministry how could he not use him? I believe the long fingers of the Dark Mark have reached far inside the Order, the Ministry and Hogwarts. Mandy From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 18 15:17:07 2003 From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:17:07 -0000 Subject: No More Questions (was Reflections On That Mirror) In-Reply-To: <4DF20021-19D3-11D8-8871-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85322 Hey, Kneas...you've set me off a-rambling. Warning: This post is full of suppositions, reader paranoia and unfinished sentences. Kneasy: >>I've been reading, or rather re-reading PS again and having further thoughts about the Mirror - the Erised job. I'm beginning to suspect that everything is not quite as advertised by Dumbledore.>> Mmm. And you are coming to this conclusion - now...? >>Has Harry's nose ever been described? If it has I can't find it. But apparently it's distinctive enough to be recognised.>> Umm... James's nose was slightly longer than Harry's (OoP - 565). So that could well be an Evans nose, then. Anyway, on with the real fun: >>But the Mirror. Can't help feeling Harry missed a trick there. Wouldn't it be natural for him to ask DD who all those people were? Once again we are relying on DD for the facts. His most significant utterance was probably "But no more questions." Pity. I've got lots.>> Me too. You are forgetting JKR's master stroke, however, that great big cover-it-all-up she introduced right at the beginning: "Don't ask questions - that was the first rule for a quiet life with the Dursleys" (PS, Bloomsbury hardback, 20) So - if glaring inconsistancies are revealed, or if the entire readership ends each novel screaming at the Harry-focalised narration "WHY didn't you ask THIS, you stupid bugger?" - it's covered. It's all due to his upbringing. It's psychological. "Don't ask questions" "No more questions" - The Dursleys and Dumbledore between them contrive to silence Harry on various issues - things which if known would let a fair few Kneazles out of various bags. The Dursleys' great secret is Harry's magic (or it was until OoP. Petunia...?), something which would shatter their strived for lifestyle. And Dumbledore? Well, we have the OoP-given explanation - he'd got so fond of Kiddy Harry that he didn't want to hurt him with the truth. That all of our questions haven't been answered though, that Harry has been distracted with the Whacking Great Issue (to kill or be killed) just at the time when he had finally got himself into a questioning mentality, is I think, more of the same plot device. Of course, Harry would *have* to ask questions at some point, and JKR accordingly has to distract him in order to maintain suspense. I don't trust her narrator or her all-knowing Albus, though. Is there a sense perhaps that the readers were also to be distracted from asking the really sticky questions? She has said that people were almost there, and that she's almost given the game away - blam! along comes a hugely confusing prophecy for us to mull over until Book 6. Harry's family are apparently ousted from the debate - where are they? Why did James have to die? Why did Voldemort bother to make an exception (didn't have to die) for Lily, when he loves killing anyway ("Get out of the way, you silly girl")? Distracted by other issues entirely. By the introduction of Neville to the mix, apparently ipso facto. By the wording of the prophecy. By Harry's grief/isolation. And the question Harry should have asked some time ago - that little publicity teaser - turns out to be why he has to stay with the Dursleys. Bah. Write more about the Mirror, please, Kneas. I'm not quite sure if I get your secondary point at the moment - that the Mirror operates like the Room of Requirement, perhaps? Can only conjure/Summon things which already (have) exist(ed) - Madam Hooch's whistle/Moody's Foeglass - Ron sees the real Quidditch Cup, Harry sees his real family? But Ron is potentially the next Quiiditch Captain/Head Boy -? nope, I'm lost again. Cauldrons of Flobberworms all over the place. Look at the mess you've made, Kneasy! Kirstini From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Tue Nov 18 14:32:49 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (Iggy McSnurd) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 08:32:49 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's dead brother References: Message-ID: <005201c3ade0$d9bc9440$afd61e43@rick> No: HPFGUIDX 85323 > sera says: > I think this would possibly explain why there is an age gap between > the two oldest Weasleys and Percy. I always thought it was odd. I read > some fanfics going for similiar explanations, and it made perfect > sense. Molly far more than just worried after the Wrold Cup thing. > Maybe she's afraid to see another child dead. Iggy here: It would also explain why, as experienced a witch as she is, she's still overcome to the point of needing aid when she faces the Boggart in OotP. She's been through it before and all the memories and feelings come rushing back to her when the Boggart shows her the possibility of more slain family members... Iggy McSnurd From michaeljacksonfan1970 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 12:31:28 2003 From: michaeljacksonfan1970 at yahoo.com (michaeljacksonfan1970) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:31:28 -0000 Subject: To clarify. In-Reply-To: <10f.28ca07cb.2ceb3635@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85324 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > Carol brought up an interesting point and I want to address it before I fall > down from sleep deprivation. I do NOT think Snape is horrible. I don't think he is horrible either. Still, I don't think his motivations are all that clear, even after the last book. I can't wait to read your Snape defense, though. >I stand by all > my assessments of Snape in the past. I love Snape. I have called him many > things. ( He will always be Sexy Snape to me) Sexy, huh? Why is that? None of the descriptions of him in the books are really that way. I always wonder if people who find Snape sexy have solid romantic relationships in their real lives. Or does their infatuation with Snape mean they like that personality type generally? ~Madeline From rredordead at aol.com Tue Nov 18 15:23:53 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:23:53 -0000 Subject: Simultaneous Worldwide Publication? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85325 It looks like more than one person has commented in this post but I could not tell who wrote what and snipped what. I think: "Steve" wrote: > > Currently there is a thread 'What if Harry dies?', and an aspect of> this has been the speculation that if word got out of Harry's death > in the last book, people would refuse to buy it, and the publishers would refuse to print it. > > Readers refuse to buy- > > I don't think that is true. > (snip) Now me? Didn't we have Simultaneous English speaking worldwide publication for book 5? There is no way the readers would refuse to buy any of the books in the series even if Harry dies. The trouble would be keeping it a secret. As soon as the news breaks it will be all over the press. To give credit to the fans though, not one person I know gave away the secret of who dies in Book 4 back in 2000 or in book 5 this year. I believe we all love the sags so much that we willingly keep the secret so as not to spoil for the rest. The press is a very different matter. Book 5's death was all over the internet and the New York news papers. (I refused to log on or pick up a paper until I finished the book.) I believe a paper in Canada actually printed an obituary and published it on Sat morning. Talk about spilling the beans. Not much we can do about it though. Mandy From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Tue Nov 18 15:24:25 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:24:25 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Reflections On That Mirror References: Message-ID: <000801c3ade8$0d1c9220$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85326 B Arrowsmith wrote: (snip) > Ah, excuse me, but wasn't that what Quirrell was up to? Finding the > Stone? He had no intention of using it - "I see the Stone...I'm > presenting it to my master...but where is it?" Joj: Yes, but what ever Voldemort wanted done with the stone, Quirrell had to do it for him. V had no body of his own. So, yes, Quirrell wanted to use it on behalf of someone else, but use it nonetheless. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rredordead at aol.com Tue Nov 18 15:29:39 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:29:39 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: <005201c3ade0$d9bc9440$afd61e43@rick> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85327 > > sera says: > > I think this would possibly explain why there is an age gap between > > the two oldest Weasleys and Percy. I always thought it was odd. I read > > some fanfics going for similiar explanations, and it made perfect > > sense. Molly far more than just worried after the Wrold Cup thing. > > Maybe she's afraid to see another child dead. > > Iggy said: > It would also explain why, as experienced a witch as she is, she's still > overcome to the point of needing aid when she faces the Boggart in OotP. > She's been through it before and all the memories and feelings come rushing > back to her when the Boggart shows her the possibility of more slain family > members... Love this theory. It's the first time I've heard it. Two questions though. First: Wouldn't we have seen the face of the dead boy appear as one of the Boggart's transformations? Does anyone remember if we saw an unidentified male pop-up dead on the floor? I don't think we did. Doesn't mean it didn't happen before Harry entered the room though. Second: Would that mean that Ron should be able to see the Theastrals? What is the age gap between Ron and the missing boy? And would Ron have been old enough to have experienced his brother's death. That was more than two questions. :-) Mandy From kcawte at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 18 23:39:26 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:39:26 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: To clarify. References: Message-ID: <006701c3ae2d$3cf730a0$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 85328 Madeline > Sexy, huh? Why is that? None of the descriptions of him in the books > are really that way. I always wonder if people who find Snape sexy > have solid romantic relationships in their real lives. Or does their > infatuation with Snape mean they like that personality type generally? > K On the contrary I think the book descriptions are perfectly in line with him being sexy - not necessarily good looking though. There are plenty of us who have gone into detail on what we find sexy about him on past Snape threads, just search the archive, I *know* I've explained it in detail at least twice. I can't be bothered to do it again right now, but if the question is still hanging around when I have some spare time I might go into it. K From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Nov 18 15:38:22 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:38:22 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85329 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Florentine Maier" wrote: > I presume that it's not just a rumor but that the post is actually jinxed. > > I think the jinx could go something like that: "Everybody who takes > the job of DADA-teacher will come to grief because of his/her greatest > weakness within a year." > > Cases in point: > Quirrell: Weak will > Lockhard: Vanity > Lupin: Being a werewolf > Moody: Paranoia > Umbridge: Imperiousness Jen R.: Hmmm...I think this is very good! Don't know if you're the first to theorize it, but I've personally never heard it before. This theory would tie in nicely with why Dumbledore doesn't want Snape as DADA--there would be a real reason (other than the addiction theory which has never satisfied me) of why DD fears Snape would turn to the Dark Arts again if he's the DADA teacher. OTOH, I don't like the idea that DD knowingly brought Lupin and the person he believed to be Moody into a jinxed position. Although of course, he always has the Choice Theory to fall back on--he was up front with both Lupin and Moody that the position was jinxed and they accepted anyway. I like it! From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Tue Nov 18 15:48:23 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 10:48:23 -0500 Subject: Neville's Gran Message-ID: <000701c3adeb$66242330$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85330 We know Neville is going to play a big part in the books to come, but knowing JKR, there must be many clues in the last 5. I am very suspicious of his Grandmother. I think she's spent her time making Neville clumsy and forgetful and think she almost got away with passing off as a squib, until his uncle ruined it by dropping him out the window. I'm also not so sure that the wand he's been using is actually his fathers. How do we or he really know that for sure? Because Granny said so. JKR made sure we noticed about his wand. Why bother him getting a new one, if something isn't going to be different with the new one. A lot of people think it's "the wand chooses the wizard thing", but there was no noticeable difference when Ron got a new one. Also, there's been speculation that someone may be drugging Neville's parents in St. Mungos. Granny could visit as often as she wants , and not arouse any suspicion. I could be crazy, but I think we might have Evil!Gran! Joj Joj From catherinemck at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 16:05:42 2003 From: catherinemck at hotmail.com (catherinemckiernan) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:05:42 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85331 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Florentine Maier" > wrote: > > I presume that it's not just a rumor but that the post is actually > jinxed. > > > > I think the jinx could go something like that: "Everybody who takes > > the job of DADA-teacher will come to grief because of his/her > greatest > > weakness within a year." > > > > Cases in point: > > Quirrell: Weak will > > Lockhard: Vanity > > Lupin: Being a werewolf > > Moody: Paranoia > > Umbridge: Imperiousness > > > > Jen R.: Hmmm...I think this is very good! Don't know if you're the > first to theorize it, but I've personally never heard it before. > Me: I have vague memories of this, but am not sure where! It's a good theory, except that Lupin's weakness is not being a werewolf, but the desire for social acceptance and for people to think well of him. Hence his not telling Dumbledore that the Marauders were animagi because he explicitly says that he doesn?t want Dd to think he betrayed his trust. Hence also, I fear, his not telling Snape strongly enough to restart the occlumency lessons in OotP. Oops, more angst for Remus. Fortunately this supports the jinx argument! > This theory would tie in nicely with why Dumbledore doesn't want > Snape as DADA--there would be a real reason (other than the > addiction theory which has never satisfied me) of why DD fears Snape > would turn to the Dark Arts again if he's the DADA teacher. Me again: Jen's comment seems fair. HOwever I also wonder whether rumour of the jinx could make Snape himself want the post _more_? He could see it as an opportunity to overcome his weaknesses and prove his worth once and for all, not least to himself. Catherine McK From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 19 00:10:26 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:10:26 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's Gran References: <000701c3adeb$66242330$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: <008d01c3ae31$90ef2c90$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 85332 Joj > We know Neville is going to play a big part in the books to come, but > knowing JKR, there must be many clues in the last 5. > > I am very suspicious of his Grandmother. I think she's spent her time > making Neville clumsy and forgetful and think she almost got away with > passing off as a squib, until his uncle ruined it by dropping him out the > window. > K this part of your theory could be true even without her being Evil!Gran, she could be Overly-Protective-&-Ever-So-Slightly-Nuts!Gran. Her son was a reasonably strong wizard who grew up to marry, have a child - and then get horribly tortured and driven insane. Maybe she's (consciously or subconsciously) trying to make sure Neville never thinks of doing anything at all heroic and getting himself killed, he is after all pretty much all she has left of her son.If he had been a squib he could have lived in the muggle world and kept out of the war with voldemort all together. She lost her son and daughter-in-law to Voldemort (and possibly her husband - for a race who have longer lifespans than muggles there are suspiciously few wizarding grandparents around, maybe a sign of how destructive the last war against V was) so she desperately wants to keep Neville safe. K From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 16:13:59 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:13:59 -0000 Subject: In Defence Of Lupin ( very, very long) Part Two In-Reply-To: <140.1cc57dce.2ceb2fe5@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85333 First of all, kudos to Tonks for a great pair of posts! Jumping in on her side, I want to refer to Lupin's part in the DoM battle: Tonks wrote: > Our next scene with Lupin in OoP has caused much suspicion. Lupin and Sirius > with others from the Order arrive at the Ministry to save Harry. There is a > great battle and Sirius falls behind the veil. Lupin explains to Harry that he > is gone. I have read the theories. ESE!Lupin doesn't want Harry to find out > what is behind the veil, etc. Rubbish, IMO. >From > what we know the veil, it is the veil between life and death. Lupin > stopping Harry is Lupin keeping Harry from suicide. And: > In the battle with the DE's. there has been more speculation on ESE!Lupin and > the prophecy. I agree with those that have said if ESE!Lupin were a reality, > he would have endeavoured to save the prophecy, but if you look at the scene > his main focus is saving Harry's bum. He is clearly not working for LV. Annemehr: Actually, I think your case is stronger than you make out. First, to deal with whether or not the veil is the gateway to death: I agree that JKR intends that it is, and I'm also aware of the speculation that it really isn't, that Sirius is really hidden somewhere. Really, the two sides are at an impasse and there's not much point in arguing until there's more information. Still, even if you are one who believes "the veil is not what it seems," you have nothing to point to Good!Lupin or ESE!Lupin based on this bit of pure speculation which could lead anywhere -- meaning no disrespect for your interpretation but only to say that it proves nothing about Lupin. Also, as Anne Geldermann has just pointed out on another Lupin thread (post #85313), it certainly would have been very easy for Lupin to allow Harry to run through the veil by just pretending he was unable to hold him. After all, Harry is described as struggling "viciously" against Lupin in order to reach the veil. I imagine Lupin is quite a bit bruised. He really did save Harry from an unintended suicide. But, Lupin did it to save the prophecy, some say? Why? Voldemort wanted that prophecy in the hope that it contained a clue as to how he could kill Harry. If Harry runs himself and the prophecy orb right through the veil, Voldemort has won. One could even argue that the prophecy itself would then be fulfilled, that Harry would have then died *at Voldemort's hand,* if we don't have to take that clause literally. After all, the situation itself was set up directly by Voldemort, so responsibility for Harry's death would have been traced back to him. Anyway, if you *really* want to take that clause literally, one of them is going to have to strangle the other with his bare hands. Count on it. If Lupin was ESE, he would have let Harry run right through that veil. Annemehr From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 16:24:30 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:24:30 -0000 Subject: Red and Green and Gold and Silver:(Was: Harry's green eyes) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85334 Kirstini wrote: > Well, Harry's jet of light is red because it comes from the > Expelliarumus spell, whereas Voldemort's is green because it's an > Avada Kedavra. Harry's earliest memory: jets of green light=bad. Then > he gets to Hogwarts where green = Slytherin = Draco = enemy. I don't > know if we have it anywhere else in canon that Expelliarumus is a red > jet though - we know that Stupefy is. Someone flag down a passing > L.O.O.N? Aw, we don't need an actual L.O.O.N.! I just went to the first time we saw the spell cast, at the Duelling Club meeting: "[...] Snape cried: 'Expelliarmus!' There was a dazzling flash of scarlet light and Lockhart was blasted off his feet: [...]" Annemehr who loves that scene; silly wand waving, indeed -- that was a blast of pure *power!* (hmmm... I never realised the depth of these feelings before...) From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 16:46:30 2003 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:46:30 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory/Time Turner In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85335 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "aaoconnor2002" message 83288 wrote: > Over the past several days many people have posted thoughts and > theories about Mark Evans and his possible relationship to Harry. > Most people believe, and I agree, that it is too much of a > coincidence to have a character named Evans appear when we know that > Evans was also Lily's maiden name. "K": I also believe there has to be some sort of connection between Harry and Mark Evans. It's just too much of a coincidence. The fun part is in trying to figure out what that connection is. Audrey: > I fear, and fear is the correct word, > that we may be looking at the situation too two-dimensionally (or > three-dimensionally). >What if Mark and Harry are not related yet? > I'm not really sure why but I have never liked time travel stories. >I did enjoy PoA immensely but, in my mind, it opened doors to places > I really didn't want the story to go. The room in the DoM that was > full of breaking and reassembling time turners leads me to believe > that we haven't heard the end of time travel in this series. "K": Now this is what got my attention. I most definitely believe and fear the time turner is going to end up playing a big role in this series. Like you, I also don't like those types of stories so I hope I'm wrong. PoA was just an introduction to the time turner. I think there are little hints in the books that point to the dreaded time turner coming back. I just don't have the time to look for them again. Audrey: > As implausible as it may sound, what if Mark is actually an >ancestor of Harry? That would explain why Dumbledore couldn't take >Baby Harry to Mark's parents even if Dumbledore knew there would be >a connection eventually. "K": Surely Dumbledore knows about Mark Evans. Since Dumbledore has provided Harry with some protection while at Privet Drive, who is to say Mark Evans isn't in the same area for protection also? How convenient would that be? Audrey: > So, all we have to do to have this come to pass is have an 11 or 12 > year old Mark get seriously zapped by a time turner sometime in the > next two years (Hogwarts time). Hey, I didn't say it was probable. > I didn't even say it was likely. I just know it's not impossible. "K": Nothing is impossible in these books. Now I'm not sure about Mark being an ancestor of Harry, but I won't just toss that theory aside. I just get the impression that some person used the time turner (Tom Riddle? Harry?) and things are really screwed up. Someone is going to have to go back in time at some point and I believe that will be Harry. Exactly where Mark fits into all of this I don't know but he just has to be part of the Lily/Petunia/Harry family. Others have mentioned that Mark is a name that can be thought of as 'being marked' as Harry is marked. I know someone who loves to look at name meanings in the Potter books and here is another way to look at Mark. ~~~ MARK (Evans): Mark, a 1-syllable boy's name of Latin origin, means: Warlike; a warrior. Originating from: Swedish/Traditional meaning: Warring Originating from: Latin/Traditional meaning: Hammer Originating from: English/Traditional meaning: "Of Mars; the god of war." Form of Marcus. (Mark/Marcus: Latin name of uncertain derivation. Most believe it has its root in Mars, the name of the Roman mythological god of war, and is therefore given the meaning "war-like). HARRY (Evans) Potter: Harry/Princely Harold, Harry, Harris Anglo Saxon/ /Power Harry English/A variant of Henry meaning home or house protector. Also can be a diminutive of Harold: 'Army commander.'. Army. Harry German Form of Harold/Army-Power Harry Norse/War chief. Harry Swedish/Swedish form of Henry 'rules the home'. Harry Teutonic/Mighty in war. Originating from: English/Traditional meaning: Army man Originating from: Norse/Traditional meaning: War chief Originating from: Teutonic/Traditional meaning: Mighty in war Originating from: Swedish/Traditional meaning: Swedish form of Henry "rules the home" Harry, a 2-syllable boy's name of Teutonic/Old English origin, means: Head of the house; warrior. ~~~ Harry and Mark. Both names have a *war* meaning. > Audrey (who can't believe she has de-lurked after some time to post > this and will wear her yellow raincoat for the next 72 hours to > protect herself from the inevitable rotten tomatoes) Nah. No tomatoes for you . Let's save the rotten tomatoes for the time turner. "K" From jjpandy at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 15:38:00 2003 From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:38:00 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85336 Mandy wrote: > Second: Would that mean that Ron should be able to see the > Theastrals? What is the age gap between Ron and the missing boy? And > would Ron have been old enough to have experienced his brother's > death. JJPandy's reply: At what age is a child old enough to experience the death of someone so that they can see the Theastrals? Harry was one year old and present at his mother's murder, yet he did not see the Theastrals until after he saw Cedric die. Does this mean that you have to be old enough to understand that a death has occurred? From Koinonia2 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 17:05:07 2003 From: Koinonia2 at hotmail.com (koinonia02) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:05:07 -0000 Subject: Sirius expendable? In-Reply-To: <1ee.138e0d0e.2ceb33db@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85337 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, nymphadoraotonks at a... wrote: > And, I think we will see something of him to come. "K": I also think we will see Sirius. Whether it's from behind the veil or that mirror I'm not sure. But I also think we will see Sirius in the *past*. I'm going to stand by my belief that there was more to the hatred between Snape and Black and we will find out later what that was. I know some have suggested Sirius didn't play that important of a role in the series. Just because a character has died doesn't mean he isn't still important to the story. I just don't believe we have been told all there is to know about Sirius Black. I personally prefer the adult characters to the kids so I look forward to finding out more about the past. Black? Yeah, he's a main character. "K" From annemehr at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 17:06:05 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:06:05 -0000 Subject: I *love* tragic endings ! -- With an aside to Melody In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85338 Jennifer wrote: > > It would be gutsy to > > to kill Harry but I wouldn't want it to be gutsy for the sake of > > guts. Harry's death would break untold hearts, and disaffect them > > as well. A "happy ending" isn't necessary but a satisfactory one > > is. I am very hopeful JKR will want Harry to triumph over Lord > > Voldemort and live to tell the tale. > > Jennifer Del replied: > There seems to be quite a few people out there who share Jennifer's > opinion that JKR "can't" kill Harry, that it somehow wouldn't > be "nice" or "fair" to her young readers. > > I just don't understand. When I was a kid, I simply LOVED it when > the/a main character died at the end of a book ! It made the book (or > the series of books) so much more precious > Moreover, it seemed quite unnatural to me to see a character live a > great deal of their life in Hell, and quite suddenly end up in Heaven > for the rest of their life.[...] > That's why I also loved the endings that showed the/a main > character living a misfit's life at least for a while as a result of > their past trauma. Annemehr: Well, Harry can live and the ending can still be reflective of how much evil Voldemort did in the world. In fact, I'm sure that, whether Harry lives or dies, JKR will leave the consequences of evil very apparent; it's reflected in her decision that even in the WW, once you're dead, you're dead, and she has promised deaths to come. I think, Jennifer and Del, you may both get your wish. If Harry lives, he will certainly be changed and scarred more than he was when the series began. And notice, Jennifer drew a distinction between having Harry live and the proverbial "happy ending." Let Kneasy not lump *us* in with the sunset and butterflies and rose-colored-glasses crowd! ;-) I actually have no idea whether Harry will live or not. I just know what I *want* -- for him to survive. It's because Harry's whole life, except maybe for 15 months he can't remember, has been living a life tainted by Voldemort. I'd just like to see him be "just Harry" for a while, free to live without reference to what he "ought" to be doing about the Dark Lord. Not that I believe I would be completely disaffected if he died. You see, I am very confident that when JKR first worked out Harry's story, she followed it to a *very* profound conclusion -- I can almost "hear" it in her "voice" as she skirts around the ending in interviews (which I am in the process of reading through). It's just that I don't believe a profound, fitting ending necessarily requires the death of Harry. By the way, Melody, ::waves:: getting back to your point about Harry being so damaged by the end that it is not really possible for him to live any longer (an opinion I've seen from others also), I have a thought. See, I argued that there would always be *some* reason to live, which is why I could see Harry being able to have a worthwhile life after Voldemort. I still think that is true. But, what if it is true, and Harry still dies? Doesn't Harry make a bigger sacrifice in death if he could have had something to live for, making your ending all the more intense? Annemehr sneakily working on Melody's emotions, in the (forlorn) hope of swaying her to her own point of view, and hoping she actually has time to read this message From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 17:25:05 2003 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:25:05 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85339 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "G Miller" wrote: > > Good literary examples and I agree the "HP and the Next Great > Adventure" would be an excellent title for book 7. (Although > that > would probably give away the ending) Yeah, that's why I think it'll be a chapter title, if it is anything at all. > JKR could be utilizing another literary technique that she > has used to some extent already. That is, the set up for the > opposite (or unexpected) to happen. (one example would be H's > dreams of S in danger that turns out to be a trap and ends up with S > being killed anyway, > TVTFTG > (The very tired father of twin girls) Your perception of the pattern seems valid. It seems indicative that both GoF and OotP ended on big bummer notes (LV's return, and LV's rise, respectively), which might mean that Book 6 ends happy, which means Book 7 ends with HP's demise. Ah, such speculation. I thought of a most appropriate series to compare HP to: The Rabbit series by Updike. It deals with the maturation of a man through decades of life, and the last book is called *Rabbit at Rest*, in which Rabbit Angstrom dies, and which uncomfortably echoes DD's line about needing *rest* "the end of a very, *very* long day." TK -- Tigerpatronus From phoenixtears at fuse.net Tue Nov 18 17:41:06 2003 From: phoenixtears at fuse.net (phoenixmum) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:41:06 -0000 Subject: The Evans Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85340 Agreeing with Geoff: I, too, thought the Evans name was too great a coincidence to be insignificant. I assummed that we would find out in a later book that Mark was some distant relative of Harry's through his mother, like a second or third cousin ( I never have understood how these degrees of relatedness were calculated). But I've just now begun to wonder if Dudley knows of this relatedness. Petunia seems to be totally cut off from her own family, or it is all deceased. Does Dudley even know that his mother's maiden name is Evans, or does he just assume that the Evans name is common enough that there is no connection. Does he in fact pick on Mark *because* he is a relation? If he is a wizarding but squib relation, that would explain his particular hostility to Mark. But I'm inclined to believe that it's just Mark's small size that makes him a target. I also agree with the theory that any other relation besides Petunia was not close enough in blood for Dumbledore's protective charm to work, but can see the possibility that DD just was unaware of these distant relatives. Perhaps Mark, if of wizarding descent, was also orphaned and placed with non-wizarding relatives, or is the child of a deceased wizard/witch and a muggle parent. If the latter, that would explain the ministry having no record of his presence: he hasn't shown signs of magic, and his living parent is a muggle (or squib). Phoenix From sylviablundell at aol.com Tue Nov 18 18:12:30 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:12:30 -0000 Subject: I love tragic endings Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85341 I was interested in Melody's point about Harry being so damaged by the end that it is not really possible for him to live any longer. Dickens' original ending to Great Expectations was written along similar lines. Both Pip and Estella have been so badly damaged by their up-bringing, that there is no real future for them. They separate at the end of the book, both condemned to live a lonely and unfulfilled life. Dickens was persuaded by his friend Bulwer Lytton to change this ending to a happier and more conventional one. Controversy has raged ever since about which ending is better. Probably in a hundred years time, our descendants will be arguing about the ending JKR comes up with. Sylvia (a sucker for happy endings) From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Tue Nov 18 18:17:33 2003 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:17:33 -0000 Subject: ASRWLL and ? - The Gang of Slytherins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85342 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > It is canon that there were a group of Slytherins in the MWPP era > who all became DE's, but that seems to be the extent of > generalizations we can make about a group of students in one house > (correct me if I'm wrong). No big correction, but on another note it was "a gang of Slytherins: almost all of whom became Death Eaters." Now we know Avery, Rosier, Wilkes and the Lestranges did become DEs, and I've always wanted to know more about them, but more and more I'm wondering *who* didn't? Which person/people who hung out with Snape in Slytherin didn't join Voldemort? The mysterious Florence, perhaps? Or maybe Alice Longbottom, whom Snape was in love with, thus explaining why he hates Neville so much? ;-) And will we be meeting our secretive non-DEs? Eileen From lawtrainer at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 18:18:07 2003 From: lawtrainer at yahoo.com (Jana Fisher) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:18:07 -0000 Subject: Reflections On That Mirror In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85343 > B Arrowsmith wrote: > > (snip) > > Ron stood in front of the Mirror and sees himself as Head Boy, > > Head of Quidditch and holding the Quidditch Cup. > > > > Oh, how we laughed! > > > > Ron is now a Prefect and a Quidditch hero, with still two years to > > go at school. Hello? Anyone getting a strange feeling about this? "Doriane" wrote: > Nah :-) For me, it only illustrates that one can start with the worst > odds against him...(snipped) There are many instances where it seems that Ron is joking, only to have his jokes come true. Even though this wasn't a joke, but his desires, I hope it comes true. I personally love the idea of Ron being Quidditch captain. My guess is in the seventh book (Dark League of Theorising, Kneasy :) Harry will become Quidditch Captain, but will become incapacitated somehow, and Ron is there as the Senior member to take his place as Captain. And of course Gryffindor will win the Quidditch Cup. So Ron will be holding the Cup when they win. Head Boy? I have my doubts about that due to his un-Percy like personality and lack of stellar grades ...but we never know what JKR has up her sleeve. Jana - A Weasley Fan From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 18:30:09 2003 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:30:09 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ron's dead brother Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85344 pjcousins at btinternet.com said: >If Harry hears a voice similar to Ron's, could it be the voice >of the often speculated 'missing Weasley' ? >A brother between Charlie + Bill --- gap --- and Percy. >Remember in GoF at Wizard World Cup, Arthur Weasley explains to the >youngsters the fear of coming home and finding the Dark Mark hovering >over your house. Arthur may have been talking from personal >experience. He may indeed. And regarding a possible missing Weasley, Arthur also points out that Charlie and Bill are too young to remember such things. Which might mean that they don't remember a missing brother either -- if no one mentioned him and all trace of him was hidden (for whatever reasons, including the Weasley parents' desire to get on with their lives with their remaining children). Note that if the missing child was a boy, that would make Ron the seventh son. I wonder how many brothers Arthur Weasley had? :) Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ >From Beethoven to the Rolling Stones, your favorite music is always playing on MSN Radio Plus. No ads, no talk. Trial month FREE! http://join.msn.com/?page=offers/premiumradio From manawydan at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 18 18:35:47 2003 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:35:47 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Percy Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? References: <1069108114.13451.86594.m8@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002901c3ae02$d599cd20$034e6751@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 85346 Rebecca: >I've heard this before (and you've certainly heard our >theories many times). But for some of us, his >behavior is *not* explicable. It doesn't make sense. I think in many ways Percy has suffered the same kind of treatment that constitutes brainwashing. First of all he undergoes interrogation as part of the investigation into Barty's death. Knowing what we do about the WW system of justice, that _must_ have been a very nasty experience (I speak with personal experience of an internal investigation in a real world government department which left several people very scared indeed and one so badly damaged that she suffered stress-related illness and needed counselling. And that was an open interview, with a union rep present, and strict procedures being followed to ensure fairness!) Secondly, we don't know whether or not he's exonerated from the charges. Fudge may still have the Barty dossier held over Percy's head, which he could revive at any time if he wanted to. Percy really has no choice but to be very very obedient and toe the party line very diligently. Thirdly, Percy joined the MoM because he wanted a career there. Bearing in mind wizarding life spans, his working life may well be over a century. He really doesn't want to throw that away right at the beginning, after all, what else could he do, especially with a dishonourable discharge on his employment history. And finally, to come back to the brainwashing point, Percy's effectively a hostage. And it's known that hostages, exposed to the beliefs of their captors, can start to accept and take on board those beliefs. But of course, JKR alone knows all! >You give many good insights. But to me, it doesn't >add up to OOTP Percy. He went from three-dimensional >to two. His storyline was not resolved and he neither >apologized nor reacted defesively. That of course is something that's said about a number of the story lines in OoP. It's not resolved. He could indeed apologise (and I'm sure his parents would forgive him). It may be that Fudge will decide it's "time to spend more time with his family" and there will be a new Minister. A lot will hang on who that Minister is, which MoM faction they come from, and whether they will still _want_ Percy working in their office. I look forward to more story in the next book. >And even if he did seriously believe all the things >Fudge said, his behavior is still not consistent with >GOF when he believed everything Crouch said. Unless you think of Percy as someone who's very good at believing everything his boss says! Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 18:37:39 2003 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:37:39 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's dead brother Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85347 rredordead at aol.com asked: >Second: Would that mean that Ron should be able to see the >Theastrals? What is the age gap between Ron and the missing boy? And >would Ron have been old enough to have experienced his brother's >death. If Charlie and Bill weren't old enough to remember it, then Ron definitely wasn't. And don't you have to actually *witness* a death? That was why, in my opinion, Harry couldn't see the thestrals until he saw Cedric die. He was present at his mother's death but did not actually see it (even if he were capable of understanding it at the age of eighteen months). If not for the dementors, he would probably not remember anything except the green light of Voldemort's failed curse. Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ MSN Messenger with backgrounds, emoticons and more. http://www.msnmessenger-download.com/tracking/cdp_customize From kate_bag at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 17:06:52 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:06:52 -0000 Subject: Harry's green eyes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85348 > I hope you're right that the green eyes reflect Lily's soul and that > the resemblance rather than the color is significant. But what's > extremely odd is that the eye colors and wand light colors are > opposite. In other words, Voldemort has red eyes but the light from > his wand is green, matching Tom Riddle's old house: Slytherin. Harry > has green eyes but the light from his wand is red, matching the > scarlet of Gryffindor. > > What on earth does it mean? It can't be that green (Slytherin) = evil > and red or scarlet (Gryffindor) = good. That's too simplistic and the > eyes suggest the exact opposite (though of course Slytherin = good and > and Gryffindor = evil is even more absurd). The union of the houses? > The end of rivalry and division at Hogwarts? Is gold associated with > Fawkes the Phoenix? The only thing I can think of now that's golden is > the snitch, and that leads us exactly nowhere. On the same vein, it's interesting to note that when Harry first picks up his future wand in Olivander's (PS, p 65 UK ed), the sparks that shoot out of it are described as being red and gold. Gryffindor colours to be sure...there seems to be a lot of repetition in the colours emitting from wizards' wands. Coincidence??? Maybe...but then again, not much in Rowling's writing ever turns out to be coincidence... ~Kate From templerichmond at earthlink.net Tue Nov 18 17:15:28 2003 From: templerichmond at earthlink.net (canismajorette) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:15:28 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85349 That Sirius is beyond the veil now touches us all. However, if this critical character is at all true to the implications of his name, he will be back to profoundly influence the remaining portion of what will ultimately be a septenary revelation, when done. I say this because the name of Sirius Black carries great implications. As most adult Harry Potter enthusiasts likely know, the brightest star in the sky (other than our Sun) is none other than the star Sirius, denoted by astronomers as Alpha Canis Major. This appelation means that it is the first (alpha) or brightest star in the constellation of the Greater Dog (From Canis, Latin for dog, being the rootword for our word "canine," doglike; and Major, Latin for "greater" or bigger. There is another smaller dog constellation called the Lesser Dog. That'w why the distinction is made). Canis Major has been affiliated with "dog" symbolism since ancient Egyptian times, when the early Egyptian stellar religion equated this constellation with its god, Anubis, a jackal headed figure. Jackals are of course of the canine family, so the popular characterization of the brightest star in this constellation became "The Dog Star." No mere coincidence is it that Sirius Black, the animagus, thus transforms into a large black dog. Rowling's multiple levels of genius show through here. Not only is she a master of ambience and invention, but also a savant well familiar with the lore of the stars. Thus, Sirius the animagus invokes all the legendry connected with Sirius the star. And lo, what might that be? In the Egyptian religion the star Sirius and its nearby companion Orion stood for Isis and her mate. Their legend embodied an eternal death and rebirth theme: in other words, the reality of life beyond the grave. Or perhaps, as we might say here, the reality of life beyond the veil. There's even more to the implication of Black's name. Again, as many adult Potter fans may know, the star Sirius is considered by astronomers to be a double star. The main star is denoted Sirius A, and its smaller brown dwarf companion is called Sirius B. If we abbreviate the name for Potter's godfather, we might call him Sirius B. (for Sirius Black). I suspect that this is more than mere coincidence. In fact, I suspect that Rowling is communicating much important material to us under code, in this any many other names used in the astounding Potter material. That Sirius Black's archetype may be a such a star presents profoundly meaningful possibilities. More can be said on this topic at a later post if interest so indicates. Canis Majorette From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 17:31:52 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:31:52 -0000 Subject: Percey Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85350 I've snipped out everyone's comments--sorry. Many people seem to think Percy was under the Imperius curse performed by Lucius all through OOP. The question I have is WHY. What value would there be to perform this curse? Lucius and Fudge are very close. If LM wanted info about MOM dealings, he could probably just ask. I don't see that as a compelling reason. If LM wanted info on the Order, why would he make Percy sever ties with his family. That just doesn't make any sense. I don't see Percy acting out of character. I believe he's just a bit more comfortable to be himself now that he's out of his parents nest. I see a lot of kids that remain strongly under their parents influence after coming of age. Then, after a bit of time has passed, realize that they are truly in control of themselves and feel free to bolt away from their parents. I don't find it strange at all that Percy "comes into his own" in OOP. Just my thoughts -Hermowninny From seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 18 17:59:10 2003 From: seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk (seraphina_snape) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 17:59:10 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85351 Mandy wrote (in response to the "missing Weasley brother" theory): > First: Wouldn't we have seen the face of the dead boy appear as one > of the Boggart's transformations? Does anyone remember if we saw an > unidentified male pop-up dead on the floor? I don't think we did. > Doesn't mean it didn't happen before Harry entered the room though. > > Second: Would that mean that Ron should be able to see the > Thestrals? What is the age gap between Ron and the missing boy? And > would Ron have been old enough to have experienced his brother's > death. sera says: Question One: We wouldn't. Molly's first concern is her "current" family and those who she considers family. First of all, she worries about those, she might be in danger to lose, and after that she may remember the already lost. But before it can come to that, she's "rescued". Question Two: The age gap between them might be six or seven years (probably more). I think the death of this brother would have occurred while Voldemort was still powerful (before 1981). Meaning that Ron couldn't possibly understand what was going on (he was still a baby then, maybe he wasn't even born yet). And even if one of the DE did it after Voldy's fall, he'd still be too young. A child of three or four may know about death, but not understand it. sera PS: Of course, this is all my thinking, so feel free to object. From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 19:12:12 2003 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:12:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Percy Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: <002901c3ae02$d599cd20$034e6751@f3b7j4> Message-ID: <20031118191212.75406.qmail@web20002.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85352 > story in the next book. > > >And even if he did seriously believe all the things > >Fudge said, his behavior is still not consistent > with > >GOF when he believed everything Crouch said. > > Unless you think of Percy as someone who's very good > at believing everything > his boss says! > > Cheers > > Ffred I think you misunderstand my meaning here (either that, or I misunderstand yours). I'm not saying that what he believes is inconsistant (though it is) but that his behavior is inconsistent. In GOF, he believed "Crouch." But he was very cool and unruffled and dignified. In OOTP he is excited and emotional and frankly very weird. That's the incosistant part to me. Rebecca ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 18 19:15:13 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:15:13 -0000 Subject: Reflections On That Mirror In-Reply-To: <000801c3ade8$0d1c9220$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85353 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" wrote: >> B Arrowsmith wrote: > > (snip) > > Ah, excuse me, but wasn't that what Quirrell was up to? Finding the > > Stone? He had no intention of using it - "I see the Stone...I'm > > presenting it to my master...but where is it?" > > Joj: > Yes, but what ever Voldemort wanted done with the stone, Quirrell had to do it for him. V had no body of his own. So, yes, Quirrell wanted to use it on behalf of someone else, but use it nonetheless. > I considered that to be the case myself - just for a couple of minutes. Then I asked myself - would Voldy use the Stone while still attached to Quirrell - and give Quirrell eternal life too? Answer - no. He'd make sure the Stone was safe and then - alternative arrangements with dear Quirrell surplus to requirements. How I don't know, but I'll bet he'd already made plans. Kneasy From oneel at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 19:06:51 2003 From: oneel at yahoo.com (Tania Canedo) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:06:51 -0000 Subject: Sirius Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85354 Canis Majorette: > Thus, Sirius the animagus invokes all the legendry connected with > Sirius the star. And lo, what might that be? In the Egyptian > religion the star Sirius and its nearby companion Orion stood for > Isis and her mate. Their legend embodied an eternal death and > rebirth theme: in other words, the reality of life beyond the grave. > Or perhaps, as we might say here, the reality of life beyond the veil. Is it a coincidence, or just that I'm too high with HP Mania: "Sirius and its nearby companion Orion" (Could it be Lupin?) "stood for Isis and her mate" (could it be Lily and James?)I really agree with you, we can't underestimate Rowling, there is more to this part of the story than meets the eye, and I also agree with you when you say that this can't be a coincidence... Tania Canedo From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 18 19:22:31 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:22:31 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius expendable? Message-ID: <15.1cae0c66.2cebcb77@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85355 Hello Koinonia2 at hotmail.com, In reference to your comment: ? I also think we will see Sirius. Whether it's from behind ? the veil or that mirror I'm not sure. But I also think we ? will see Sirius in the *past*. I'm going to stand by my ? belief that there was more to the hatred between ? Snape and Black and we will find out later what that ? was. I don't think the mirror is how it will happen. After Sirius died, Harry found his half of the two way mirror. He tried to contact Sirius with it, but when the attempt failed, he threw the mirror and it broke. ( I had until this part, thought that the mirror might be the clue, as well.) -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Nov 18 19:25:11 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:25:11 -0000 Subject: ASRWLL and ? - The Gang of Slytherins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85356 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lucky_kari" wrote: > No big correction, but on another note it was "a gang of Slytherins: > almost all of whom became Death Eaters." Now we know Avery, Rosier, > Wilkes and the Lestranges did become DEs, and I've always wanted to > know more about them, but more and more I'm wondering *who* didn't? > Which person/people who hung out with Snape in Slytherin didn't join > Voldemort? > > The mysterious Florence, perhaps? > > Or maybe Alice Longbottom, whom Snape was in love with, thus > explaining why he hates Neville so much? ;-) > > And will we be meeting our secretive non-DEs? Jen R: Very compelling thought. I've been trying to think of other people we know from the Snape/MWPP era, but except for the Longbottoms, we don't know general ages of the people Moody points out in the original Order photo--the Prewett brothers, Benjy Fenwick, the Bones, Marlene Mckinnon, etc. ...Andromeda Tonks and Bertha Jorkins are probably too old for Snape's gang, although the quote doesn't specifically say the 'gang' was Snape's same year, just from Slytherin. In fact, it seems more likely he hung around with an older crowd like Lucius and his friends (perhaps Bella, Lestranges, etc?)since Malfoy and Snape know each other so well. It's a mystery--imagine that!! From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Tue Nov 18 19:40:14 2003 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 19:40:14 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Evans Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031118194014.71369.qmail@web25109.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85357 phoenixmum wrote: Agreeing with Geoff: Phoenix wrote I, too, thought the Evans name was too great a coincidence to be insignificant. I assummed that we would find out in a later book that Mark was some distant relative of Harry's through his mother, like a second or third cousin ( I never have understood how these degrees of relatedness were calculated). But I've just now begun to wonder if Dudley knows of this relatedness. Petunia seems to be totally cut off from her own family, or it is all deceased. Does Dudley even know that his mother's maiden name is Evans, or does he just assume that the Evans name is common enough that there is no connection. Does he in fact pick on Mark *because* he is a relation? If he is a wizarding but squib relation, that would explain his particular hostility to Mark. But I'm inclined to believe that it's just Mark's small size that makes him a target. I also agree with the theory that any other relation besides Petunia was not close enough in blood for Dumbledore's protective charm to work, but can see the possibility that DD just was unaware of these distant relatives. Perhaps Mark, if of wizarding descent, was also orphaned and placed with non-wizarding relatives, or is the child of a deceased wizard/witch and a muggle parent. If the latter, that would explain the ministry having no record of his presence: he hasn't shown signs of magic, and his living parent is a muggle (or squib). U_P_D Mark Evans doesn't have to live in Little Whinging. there aer a lot of places in the UK where if you move a mile you will pass through three seperately named areas. If the MoM looked in Greater, Lesser, Middle, Upper Lower, Nether or any other of at least a dozen on the same theme. They may well have found him. Udder Pendragon ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --------------------------------- Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From starmom513 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 19:15:19 2003 From: starmom513 at yahoo.com (P Dennos) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 11:15:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Neville's Gran Message-ID: <20031118191519.58893.qmail@web21306.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85358 Joj wrote: "We know Neville is going to play a big part in the books to come, but knowing JKR, there must be many clues in the last 5. I am very suspicious of his Grandmother. I think she's spent her time making Neville clumsy and forgetful and think she almost got away with passing off as a squib, until his uncle ruined it by dropping him out the window." I like your theory about Gran trying to pass Neville off as a squib. Is it possible she knows something about the prophecy and Neville's potential role in it? Could she be trying to protect him from LV by showing him NOT to be a danger? starmom513 __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From IrishMastermind at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 19:18:13 2003 From: IrishMastermind at hotmail.com (Anne Geldermann) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 14:18:13 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's dead brother Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85359 sera says: >>> I think this would possibly explain why there is an age gap between the two oldest Weasleys and Percy. I always thought it was odd. I read some fanfics going for similiar explanations, and it made perfect sense. Molly far more than just worried after the Wrold Cup thing. Maybe she's afraid to see another child dead.>>> Iggy said: >>It would also explain why, as experienced a witch as she is, she's still overcome to the point of needing aid when she faces the Boggart in OotP. She's been through it before and all the memories and feelings come rushing back to her when the Boggart shows her the possibility of moreslain family members...>> Mandy said: >First: Wouldn't we have seen the face of the dead boy appear as one of the Boggart's transformations? Does anyone remember if we saw an unidentified male pop-up dead on the floor? I don't think we did. Doesn't mean it didn't happen before Harry entered the room though.> Anne now writes: If this theory was correct though, it would probably not be a recent event. While the death of a child is not an easy thing to deal with, this would have been something she's come to terms with in the years since. Why put a fear from the distant past on the same plane as ones that may very well come true in the near future. Not to trivialize a possible Weasley death, but there are much more pressing worries. Whether this turns out right or not, it will be interesting to see if JKR makes use of any of the "seventh son" superstitions, either for Ron or for one of the twins. I don't think this is likely though. The Weasleys strike me as the type that would at least have a picture of a dead son displayed in their home, rather than trying to completely erase his memory. We haven't seen any such picture, or anything else indicating that this may be the case. Anne _________________________________________________________________ From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Tue Nov 18 15:59:32 2003 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:59:32 -0000 Subject: Simultaneous Worldwide Publication? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85360 Del wrote: > Huh, let me guess : you live in an English-speaking country, and you > always get the Hollywood's movies right when they come out in the > States, right ? Because if you lived in, say, France (like me, for > example ;-), you'd know that : > a) unless you look for it, the probability is you won't learn of the > surprise ending. I remember watching a special premiere of "The Sixth > Sense" more than a month before it officially came out in France, and > I felt horrible at the end of it, because I felt it would be nearly > impossible to hold my tongue about the surprise end. But the truth > is, nobody cared about the movie until it came out in France. It was > a big thing in many other parts of the world, but here nobody cared > about it until we had it too. So what I mean is that unless a French > HP fan really goes out of his way to find out about the end of the > 7th book, he probably won't find out about it until it is published > in French (or until he buys an English version ;-) I know many HP fans who speak only French and can attest that none of them have found out about Sirius's death, or Umbridge, or anything about l'Ordre du Ph?nix, as they call it. They all wait patiently for December the 5th. To the most obsessed of them, I even lent OoP in English and she refused to read it because she thought she could not really appreciate it. So I would be very surprised if she found out anything about book 7 beforehand. All the best, Olivier From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 18 20:17:01 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:17:01 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: To clarify. Message-ID: <16a.269feb4a.2cebd83d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85361 Hello michaeljacksonfan1970 at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? Sexy, huh? Why is that? None of the descriptions of ? him in the books are really that way. I always wonder ? if people who find Snape sexy have solid romantic ? relationships in their real lives. Or does their ? infatuation with Snape mean they like that personality ? type generally? ~Madeline Hmmm. I am trying to just take what you said as a question instead of a veiled insult of sorts. I have been in the same wonderful relationship for eight years, and I think it is easy to see that it is wonderful. Anyone who would put up with my HP obsession must love me! As for Snape being sexy, it all depends on your idea of 'sexy' and what appeals to you. Snape has a dark, mysterious bad boy image, very unlike the other darker characters- except of course Sirius- in JKR's writing. He is described as greasy and hook nosed, yes, but this is also from the point of view of someone who loathes him. His dialogue in the books has a certain bite to it. Words can make someone attractive. In essence it all has to do with the way he is written. >From every description other than greasy and hook nosed, there is definite sex appeal for me. And, because the narrative is from Harry's perspective, I haven't put much into the insults of Snape's appearance. He has always been most appealing. Whilst, Lockhart was supposed to be classically handsome, Snape seemed to have that 'ugly-sexy' appeal. 'Ugly-sexy' can be more attractive than classically handsome any day. ( I am not discounting that Snape became, if possible, more attractive when he was tainted in celluloid. However, when thinking of who should play him, Rickman was in my top five.) -Tonks [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From sunnylove0 at aol.com Tue Nov 18 20:23:38 2003 From: sunnylove0 at aol.com (sunnylove0 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:23:38 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] ASRWLL and ? - The Gang of Slytherins Message-ID: <1c7.11e3fa3f.2cebd9ca@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85362 In a message dated 11/18/2003 1:01:33 PM Mountain Standard Time, lucky_kari at yahoo.ca writes: > No big correction, but on another note it was "a gang of Slytherins: > almost all of whom became Death Eaters." Now we know Avery, Rosier, > Wilkes and the Lestranges did become DEs, and I've always wanted to > know more about them, but more and more I'm wondering *who* didn't? > Which person/people who hung out with Snape in Slytherin didn't join > Voldemort? > Could be, but keep in mind that when Sirius said this, he wasn't sure that Snape himself had been a DE. Amber [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 20:38:07 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 20:38:07 -0000 Subject: In Defence of Lupin Part ONE In-Reply-To: <7b.1cd1d572.2ceb34a2@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85363 Carol: > > ? Thanks for your lengthy defense of Lupin, much of > ? which I agree with (other than your view of Snape as > ? "horrible"). I do want to mention, though, that Lupin's > ? "deception" is only indirectly related to his relationship > ? with Snape. What he's hiding is the secret Snape > ? wants revealed: that he's a werewolf. He can't be > ? expected to reveal that to Harry, but it's concealment, > ? nonetheless. IMO both teachers are to be commended > ? here, Lupin for his courtesy to Snape and Snape for the > ? loyalty to Dumbledore that results in his making the > ? potion despite his loathing of Lupin, which is partly > ? personal but partly a very real concern for the Hogwarts > ? students who unknowingly are in close proximity to a > ? werewolf. Carol, who likes Snape but doesn't for a > ? moment think Lupin is evil > > Tonks wrote: > Carol, LOL! You must know by now that my description of Snape as 'Horrible' > was to illustrate a point. Good lord! Both as 'Snuffles" and 'Tonks' in my time > on this list, I have defended Snape as an abused child. ( We'll get on to > THAT defence some other night ) I think I am one of the few who decribes > Snape as Sexy! and that is before the films tainted my brains with images of > Alan Rickman running through my head. There is a LOT to Snape. And just in the > one instance, he was being horrible. Does he have a defence? YES!. > -Tonks, eagerly wanting to get on the Snape defence but needing sleep! Sorry, Tonks! I did think it was odd that you would use that adjective to describe Snape, but with all the very long posts last night I didn't have time to verify that the post welcoming me to the list as another Snape lover was from you. (I was pretty sure it was.) Well, you can sit me in the corner on a three-legged stool with the Sorting Hat as a dunce cap. Or better, just give me detention with sexy Snape. (We should do a poll to find out how many of the women on this list find Snape sexy. I'm sure it's a lot more than us two!) About Sirius coming back (mentioned in your previous post), the only ways we've seen the dead come back so far (not counting ghosts) are the short-lived appearances of the specters from the Priori Incantatem, the talking portraits of dead people, and the memories in the Pensieve. I suppose we could also count the waving photographs and the unspeaking images in the Mirror of Erised, but those are only memories that Harry can't really interact with. Nearly Headless Nick has already told him that Sirius probably won't come back as a ghost (though Nick could be wrong) and Harry has discovered that the two-way mirror Sirius gave him is useless for communicating with a dead person. The memories in the Pensieve talk and move but he can't interact with them. I don't think there's a portrait of Sirius at 12 Grimmauld Place (or anywhere else), so we're left with Harry dying himself (which I don't want to happen and which won't show us Sirius) or hearing his voice behind the veil in the DoM--unless ex-Professor Trelawney can conjure up his spirit, which I'm willing to bet she can't. Also JKR has said in interviews (with reference to James and Lily) that the dead can't return. And the fact that Harry's two-way mirror doesn't work confirms for me that Sirius is really dead. So I think Sirius's memory will influence Harry in some way (no doubt temporarily intensifying his hatred of Snape), but I can't see Sirius himself playing a major role. BTW, it's interesting that Snape lovers can defend other characters who sometimes oppose him. So often people think that if you like a character or historical person, you have to dislike his or her rivals. I hope no one minds my citing Percy Shelley's first and second wives as an example. Most defenders of Harriet Shelley feel compelled to attack Mary Shelley and vice versa. I like the fact that you can defend both Lupin and Snape. I sense a kindred spirit in Siriusly Snapey Susan, too. I love that ID, which seems to pop into my head every time I think about this list. Carol, who is sorry to disagree with you after such a nice post From helen at odegard.com Tue Nov 18 20:38:47 2003 From: helen at odegard.com (Helen R. Granberry) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 12:38:47 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: I love tragic endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c3ae13$f850c380$6401a8c0@helenw1> No: HPFGUIDX 85364 I was interested in Melody's point about Harry being so damaged by the end that it is not really possible for him to live any longer. Dickens' original ending to Great Expectations was written along similar lines.? Both Pip and Estella have been so badly damaged by their up-bringing, that there is no real future for them.? They separate at the end of the book, both condemned to live a lonely and unfulfilled life.? Dickens was persuaded by his friend Bulwer Lytton to change this ending to a happier and more conventional one. Controversy has raged ever since about which ending is better. Probably in a hundred years time, our descendants will be arguing about the ending JKR comes up with. Sylvia (a sucker for happy endings) I think this notion of ?too damaged to live? is... well, horrible. Not because these are kids books, I think these are everyone books. I just think that this is horrible from a philosophical perspective. Where there is life, there is hope (unless you are irredeemably evil, but that isn?t Harry). Having a tragic, messed up past may make things more difficult, but as JKR has gone to great pains to point out ? it is our choices that make us who we are. If Harry survives this thing, he will be damaged, no question. He will bear scars that cut deep. However, if it is not possible for Harry to ever find happiness in his life, then Voldemort has won because Harry has LET HIM WIN. He has let him control his life beyond death. Even if I lost everything in my life I cared about, I would want to live. I would be damaged, but I would be determined not to let it ruin my life. You only get one chance. Harry?s life has been very hard and mostly loveless. He deserves some happiness. I also think (and this is a moral judgment of Harry?s character) that he has the will and courage to not let Voldemort defeat him after he is gone. Even if he loses even more people he cares about (and I am wagering that Dumbledore, Hagrid and either Ron or Hermione are goners for sure), he still has the ability because of his moral character to move on and live a happy life. As for Pip and Estella, I think that was a completely different kind of story. Great Expectations seemed to have an entirely different message than Harry Potter. These were not heroic characters. They were messed up, but they never really made an effort to rise beyond what fate handed them. Harry has. The fact that he was able to come out of the horrible, abusive, neglectful Dursley household as well grounded as he did says a lot about Harry. He does not let random twists of fate determine the person he is. He is not a victim. Horrible things happen to him, but he fights it. He doesn?t give up or use it as an excuse. In OotP, Dumbledore talks about this pain that is worse than death. I don?t think that pain is losing what you love; I think what is worse than death is never knowing love at all -- or perhaps getting a glimpse, and knowing it is too late for you, knowing it is something you can never have because you made the wrong choices. Voldemort has chosen mere existence over truly living. He has forsaken all values in pursuit of this non-value ? living a life that is really not a life at all. Voldemort can never know happiness because he holds no values other than merely continuing to exist. He can never know love. This is worse than death ? it is a living death. Now, I will admit I want Harry to live. I am all for JKR taking risks and I don?t think she should do X or not do Y for the sake of the children. I do, however, admit to finding certain conclusions morally or philosophically disagreeable. It isn?t so much about wanting a happy ending with butterflies and sunshine, but what is the moral and philosophical conclusion of the series. Has JKR set up a world where love and happiness are impossible and life is futile? I don?t think she has. If she kills Harry, I?ll be upset. I?ll probably never read the books again knowing how it all ends. However, depending on how she goes about it, I think this can be a perfectly acceptable ?good? ending. I think killing Harry because life's not worth living anyway is probably the WORST possible conclusion. Helen (also a sucker for a happy ending) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 18 20:49:09 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 20:49:09 -0000 Subject: No More Questions (was Reflections On That Mirror) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85365 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kirstini" wrote: > > Write more about the Mirror, please, Kneas. I'm not quite sure if I > get your secondary point at the moment - that the Mirror operates > like the Room of Requirement, perhaps? Can only conjure/Summon things > which already (have) exist(ed) - Madam Hooch's whistle/Moody's > Foeglass - Ron sees the real Quidditch Cup, Harry sees his real > family? But Ron is potentially the next Quiiditch Captain/Head Boy -? > nope, I'm lost again. > > Cauldrons of Flobberworms all over the place. > Look at the mess you've made, Kneasy! > Kirstini Secondary point? Not too sure about the first; my thinking is about as disorganised as you claim yours is. Mostly it was a peg to suspend a skein of ideas from, ideas reinforced by the appearance of Harry's relatives. OK. DD seems very anxious to keep Harry away from the Mirror. Claims it is A Bad Thing. Drives you mad; you'll pine away, grow hair on your palms, whatever. But, (see Ron), this ain't necessarily so. In fact I bet you could get all sorts of ideas from that Mirror - all you have to do is want to know something badly enough. Think what Harry could do with that if he sat there long enough thinking of the future instead of the past. And DD can't allow that, can he? Also he wants to avoid too many questions - what's new? Why didn't the Mirror work the way he claimed it would re Quirrell? Our doomed DADA prof was not about to go tinkering with the Stone. Voldy wouldn't let him. Voldy would be off the back of his head before any brewing of potions or casting of spells hove into view. Why? 1. If he stayed Quirrell would become immortal too. 2. Quirrell had drunk unicorn blood; he was cursed; or at least his body was and Voldy would want to be as far away as possible before the screaming meemies hit. Does DD's spell control the Mirror as he makes out? Seems not, otherwise Quirrell would have got the Stone, by DD's own rules. Oh, I don't doubt that DD spelled it for the protection of the Stone, but that doesn't change what it is. Then there's Harry's family appearing at his shoulder. Yep; like you I reckon that's the key to the whole thing right there. Family. Harry has never asked, never been told about his antecedents. We get a load of deliberate distractions for Harry and for us as soon as it looks as if the questions might surface. Big secret. Family. The chains that bind. And I reckon the links go back to Voldemort. Now I see three possibilities: 1. The Evans' link back to the Riddles, 2. The Potters link back to Marvelo Whatever Voldy's mother was called, possibly with a name change when Voldy got nasty the first time around and the family wanted to cut all connections to such a blot on the family escutcheon, 3. Or *both* links are applicable. Since James' family is a total unknown, version 2 seems to be current favourite, except Voldy seemed a bit reluctant to zap Lily. Conversely, being family didn't save the Riddles. But the Riddles weren't Mudbloods just like Voldy and just like Lily. Sympathy from the devil? Chronic information shortage. Can't decide. Just like the noses - James had a longish nose - but so does Petunia. Which does Harry's resemble? Which is a family trait, which a coincidence? I'll think some more on this. But I'm convinced blood is the key to the whole series. Back to the Mirror. Yes, I think DD has sold Harry a pup. The Mirror is more than the description given by DD. The engraving doesn't say I show false images, fantasies, lies. What would be the point of a mirror like that? It says I show your desires. Real wants. Perhaps it shows if these wishes are realisable - if you look to the future as Ron did. I bet Sybill would give her eye teeth for something like that! But Harry, foolish boy! looked to the past and didn't ask the right questions. Kneasy, Brooding From jestahijinx at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 20:52:39 2003 From: jestahijinx at hotmail.com (Jesta Hijinx) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 20:52:39 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] male/female role models Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85366 > Dennis wrote: > > I think they happens when an author begins their book with the wrong >goal in > > mind. Instead of, "I'm going to come up with the best possible book >I can," > > they think, "I'm going to come up with a book with a female lead." > > > >Thank you, Dennis, for this very perceptive comment. I do indeed >think that this is the problem with many books written nowadays. Not >just about girls either. You could switch that to "I'm going to come >with a black lead" (I am black) etc. etc. My kids who all love to >read have had trouble in school with being intensely bored with the >required reading (which is indeed dull, I have to say; I tried some of >the books myself and hate them too). > Dennis, as someone who writes, I fully appreciate the initial comment; Mirror, I appreciate the follow-on. I do think it can be useful, at times, to hint at a multi-racial neighborhood or circle of friends - simply because it either reflects the experience of many readers, or shows the ones who live in a mostly one-color area what it might be like to live in such an area - but this can be done without clubbing somebody over the head with it. You can hint at it with physical descriptions, or even (if well done) given or surnames, or slight variations in dialect. The latter, especially, should be used sparingly if at all, because it's tough to do well, and also because some "trendy" dialects, like "gangsta", get imitated - often poorly, at that - by admirers of other races; and primarily because it can come off as a caricature or an indictment of one way of speaking compared with another. With the HP world, the body of students at Hogwarts is going to be almost entirely what you would find at a good British public school - I can't begin to imagine the breadth of accents you might find there, but I suspect JKR writes it well. She hints at various ethnic backgrounds by the students' names, occasional physical descriptions; and with Fleur and Madame Maxime, and the Durmstrang crew, with her rendition of accents. When you're writing one protagonist, you basically have a gender choice: male or female. (Overt sexual orientation choices for children's literature are yet in our future. 'Sides: in what are essentially children's action/adventure books, and not tales of teen angst, I as a reader would find it very annoying if the protagonist were constantly woffling about the boy or girl they were having their first lustful thoughts about - I speak as a long-time connoisseur of children's lit.) That, in turn, affects some of your other choices about the character. I think you have to make the choices, unless your theme is something like coming of age, coming to terms with sexuality, etc. Then these choices *are* the backbone of the plot. I think it would be possible to write an intelligent female juvenile protagonist who was *not* overly girly (as in frilly and silly), not overly a rough-edged tomboy, and might just have a select crowd of closest friends of both sexes rather than being either popular or a pariah. I think this because I knew some girls like this in high school (it's *fairly* close to me at that time, but I wasn't quite as pulled-together with an early classic fashion look as the 2-3 girls I'm thinking of). That would eliminate some of the easy outs of "fish out of water" stories, but overall it would leave a lot of room for exciting plotting in terms of what *happens* to the characters. Neither Hermione nor Luna are quite there in terms of the imaginary yardstick I've created; Ginny Weasley is actually pretty close. :-) >Mirror adds: There are plenty of other books (including or maybe even >especially fantasy) with girls as the heroes such as Alice in >Wonderland, The Wizard of Oz, all of Charlotte Bronte, Pride and >Prejudice (a favorite of Rowlings and not past the understanding of an >intelligent 12 or 13 year old) plenty of the fairy tales (a favorite >of mine was East of the Sun and West of the Moon), the Narnia books >have girls in starring roles (Lucy is certainly the heroine whenever >she appears and later books usually have pairs, such as Jill and >Eustace, with Jill being equally important). What about princess >Eilonwy in the Chronicles of Prydain? Pippi Longstocking was very >popular with my sons, if you are talking younger kids. > Add in Susan Cooper's "The Dark is Rising" series with the various children - the only thing that annoyed me was the fact that her choice for a couple of the books was a family of three children, with "the girl" being "the cautious and conservative one". In this case, it probably would have worked to have switched one of the boys for a girl with the same personality type or to have three boys, except that there were a couple of plot points served by having a girl in the mix - so she could well have just been writing the types she needed. However, my minor annoyance was, once again, having the "female" be the "voice of sanity and caution and reason", basically the "hearthkeeper" and having those duties of conscience essentially transferred to her to think and to voice. (I resent being expected to play this role in real life, so I tend to be a tiny bit prickly about it appearing in print as "the norm".) On the other hand...a couple of really good villains in the series were women. So I manage to quell my annoyance, figuring that probably it's just that one of the kids needed to be a more cautious figure, and go with the overall excellence of the characters, good and bad, male and female, all basically English but a nod to the number of Commonwealth territories toward the end. >I identify with the girl sometimes in a book and with the boy >sometimes (or women or man) and feel severely annoyed when people >suggest that there is something wrong with someone who doesn't take >only their own sex/race or whatever as their only role models. This is >a VERY silly modern idea--I thought the idea behind literature was to > make you understand others, not to build a little ghetto for >yourself, reading only about people exactly like you, doing the >current politically correct thing. > >Mirror > I agree with you about the suggestion that there's something wrong with someone who doesn't take the person of their own race or sex as the character they identify with - in _Gone With the Wind_, I identify big time with much of what Rhett Butler articulates as an iconoclast who despises hypocrisy and mostly manages to live without it, who is a doting father and fights best on a losing side - even if I think he played some horrible mind games that were literarily necessary for the conflict. :-) So far in the HP series, I've identified most with Hermione as a young person, and with Lupin, to some extent, as an adult - not because I'm a werewolf nor anything that serious, but because I have fibromyalgia, which has me tired, looking ill and sleeping whenever I can - but I also try to be as fair, rational, smart and wise as Lupin is. Felinia _________________________________________________________________ Gift-shop online from the comfort of home at MSN Shopping! No crowds, free parking. http://shopping.msn.com From erinellii at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 20:53:06 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 20:53:06 -0000 Subject: Mister Figg....? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85367 "sylvia wrote: Mr. Figg, if he ever existed, is > either dead or has legged it long ago. Perhaps he couldn't stand all > those cats. Or perhaps he was killed by Voldemort, which is why Mrs. Figg is participating in the OotP. I can't think of too many other reasons for a Squib to care what happens in the Magical world. That would explain why she dresses and acts so battily also-- it's grief. Since her husband died, she's never really been able to bring herself to care about how she appears to everyone else. Erin From oneel at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 20:31:19 2003 From: oneel at yahoo.com (Tania Canedo) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 20:31:19 -0000 Subject: To clarify. (Snape, sexy?) In-Reply-To: <16a.269feb4a.2cebd83d@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85368 > Madeline: > > ? Sexy, huh? Why is that? None of the descriptions of > ? him in the books are really that way. I always wonder > ? if people who find Snape sexy have solid romantic > ? relationships in their real lives. Or does their > ? infatuation with Snape mean they like that personality > ? type generally? ~Madeline > Tonks: >As for Snape being sexy, it all > depends on your idea of 'sexy' and what appeals to you. Snape has a dark, > mysterious bad boy image, very unlike the other darker characters- except of course > Sirius- in JKR's writing. I totally agree with you Tonks. I've always thought of Snape as a most sexy and interesting character, I love all bad-boy types, and if you come and think of it, if you give Snape a good shampoo treatment for his hair, you get a really interesting person, both physically and mentally! Tania Canedo Admin note: Please make sure that any replies on this thread are primarily canonical and discussion-based. If you simply want to agree or disagree with these sentiments, please contact the writer(s) off-list. Thankyou. From tammy at mauswerks.net Tue Nov 18 20:57:26 2003 From: tammy at mauswerks.net (Tammy Rizzo) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:57:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: In Defence of Lupin Part ONE In-Reply-To: References: <7b.1cd1d572.2ceb34a2@aol.com> Message-ID: <3FBA4166.1441.69CA62D@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 85369 Carol wrote: > We should do a poll to find out how many of the women on this list > find Snape sexy. I'm sure it's a lot more than us two! I'd have to raise my hand here, too, yup yup. Book!Snape has long held my interest, as a complicated, mysterious, powerful, intelligent man WITH a sense of humor. Okay, so it's a mean, snarky sense of humor, still he has one. Very important. I wouldn't call him 'sexy', though, so much as 'seductive'. Perhaps it's just a difference in vocabulary, but I've always thought of 'sexy' as someone (or, let's face it, someTHING) that gets the blood moving and the juices flowing, while 'seductive' is someone (things usually can't be seductive) that, for whatever reason, gets under my skin and insinuates himself into my conciousness, such that I can't get him out of my mind. I'm fascinated, drawn like a moth to the flame, knowing I shouldn't go there but helpless to resist. As for looks, well, we do only see him from Harry's perspective, so his 'looks' are skewed a bit in presentation. However, I have read some very seductive characters as presented from their seductee's (?) perspective, and some of them have been rather, erm, unappealing, physically. But they don't have to be physically attractive to be magnetic -- power, intellect, mystery, they are all seductive properties, and Snape has them all in abundance. Now, when it comes to Movie!Snape, I think the casting was brilliant, and I *adore* watching Alan to begin with, but I was already hooked on Snape before the movies came out. Book!Snape caught me from his very first uttered line, about the beauty of potions. Wow. *** Tammy tammy at mauswerks.net From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Tue Nov 18 21:01:26 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:01:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's Gran References: <20031118191519.58893.qmail@web21306.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001901c3ae17$218e98a0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85370 starmom513 wrote: I like your theory about Gran trying to pass Neville off as a squib. Is it possible she knows something about the prophecy and Neville's potential role in it? Could she be trying to protect him from LV by showing him NOT to be a danger? Joj: I also think it's important that Neville thought his Gran would kill him when she found out about the broken wand. Was she worried about the cost of another wand or is it that she made him use that "weak" wand, under the guise that it was his fathers? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 21:00:47 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:00:47 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85371 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says Am I the only person that *doesn't* find that age gap odd? Most of the nuclear units in my extended family are configured like that -- a couple of "honeymoon kids" in the beginning of the marriage, then a lull, then a couple more. I always thought it was so the parents could yell at the 'big ones' if the 'little ones' messed up. --JDR From rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu Tue Nov 18 20:58:14 2003 From: rdas at facstaff.wisc.edu (susanbones2003) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 20:58:14 -0000 Subject: I *love* tragic endings ! (Was : Re: What if Harry dies?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85372 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" wrote: > "susanbones2003" wrote (and duly snipped): > I am very hopeful JKR will want Harry to triumph over Lord > > Voldemort and live to tell the tale. > > Jennifer > Then Del wrote: > There seems to be quite a few people out there who share Jennifer's > opinion that JKR "can't" kill Harry, that it somehow wouldn't > be "nice" or "fair" to her young readers. > > I just don't understand. When I was a kid, I simply LOVED it when > the/a main character died at the end of a book ! It made the book (or > the series of books) so much more precious. Then Jennifer snipped some more: Harry gets the girl (whichever :-), and lives happily and normally ever after, now *that* > would make me sick, because it's just not real in my idea. > > Del I fear you are projecting on me the emotions of a parent wanting to protect my children or something. I never said, as Annemehr pointed out, I needed a happy ending with Harry going off into the sunset. I never mentioned how children will view this. I merely noted that people care so much for Harry that they will be devastated if he dies. And if he must, I hope it's so clearly necessary and justified sso that we can all accept it. I, not being so firmly rooted in reality as my respondent, steered clear of tragic stories as a child. Never did I love stories where the hero died. Can't really think of any at this point. Did you ever read "Death Be Not Proud?" I did and was devastated by the ending. The only thing that tempered it was the fact it was a true story. So, let's not mix apples and oranges. I am not a butterflies and rainbows type. Just trying to come to terms with emminent possibilities. Jennifer From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 18 21:02:53 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:02:53 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85373 > > It would also explain why, as experienced a witch as she is, she's still overcome to the point of needing aid when she faces the Boggart in OotP. She's been through it before and all the memories and feelings come rushing back to her when the Boggart shows her the possibility of more slain family members...>> Mandy: > Love this theory. It's the first time I've heard it. Two questions > though. > > First: Wouldn't we have seen the face of the dead boy appear as one > of the Boggart's transformations? Does anyone remember if we saw an > unidentified male pop-up dead on the floor? I don't think we did. > Doesn't mean it didn't happen before Harry entered the room though. > Geoff: I think not. What does a Boggart do? It assumes the form of your greatest fear. The child, if he existed, is now dead. Molly's concerns are for the living who she sees under threat. Therefore, the Boggart appears in turn as members of the living family but not the lost child. She cannot fear for his life any more because that time is over. From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Tue Nov 18 21:22:10 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:22:10 -0000 Subject: Simultaneous Worldwide Publication? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85374 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "olivierfouquet2000" wrote: > > I know many HP fans who speak only French and can attest that none of them have > found out about Sirius's death, or Umbridge, or anything about l'Ordre du Ph?nix, as they call it. They all wait patiently for December the 5th. To the most obsessed of them, I even lent OoP in English and she refused to read it because she thought she could not really appreciate it. So I would be very surprised if she found out anything > about book 7 beforehand. > > All the best, > > Olivier Than you were really lucky. Here in Germany, it was printed in the "Bild", a "newspaper", which you can compare to the Sun. They got a few facts wrong (probably they wanted to post the spoilers as soon as possible). For example they said, that Voldemort would die, too, in a duel with Voldemort, which was obviously not quite true. Nonetheless, I knew a few people who read it and were spoiled after this, without wanting it. And they were angry. Hickengruendler From nymphadoraotonks at aol.com Tue Nov 18 21:29:43 2003 From: nymphadoraotonks at aol.com (nymphadoraotonks at aol.com) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:29:43 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Percey Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? Message-ID: <1de.1322f970.2cebe947@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85375 Hello hermowninny719 at yahoo.com, In reference to your comment: ? Many people seem to think Percy was under the ? Imperius curse performed by Lucius all through OOP. ? The question I have is WHY. What value would there ? be to perform this curse? I whole heartedly agree with you. I have always thought that Percy was acting on his own accord in OoP. We have always known that Percy is ambitious and that he has a certain longing for power. Coupled with his background which was close to poverty, although I think Mr and Mrs Weasley have always given their children everything they need and what's more LOVE, Percy was a prime target to simply manipulate without magic. Percy entered into the Ministry in GoF. We could see his ambition there. He worshipped Mr Crouch, though Crouch didn't even know his proper surname. Percy went to great lengths to make those around him feel as though he were an important asset to the Ministry in the beginning of GoF, and he openly disagrees with his father on a few occasions. These are the roots of Percy in OoP. Percy wants to go far. I wouldn't be surprised if he wanted to become Minister. So, he is faced with a decision. Join his mother and Father and Dumbledore and be an outcast to Fudge, or be submissive and join Fudge in his slander campaign. Percy has seen what a life of 'doing right' can give. His father has, for the most part, always done the right thing. Arthur has always been on the right side, and yet it has afforded his family very little in luxury. Percy's ambition is greater than his understanding of the value of love and family. Also, Percy working in the ministry would have been influenced by Fudge and his followers much more easily than if he were at school seeing things first hand. What makes it so difficult to believe he was acting of his own accord? True, he has seen Harry through some tough times at school, but it is also true that Percy has never actually been with Harry on any of his adventures. What if Harry were just a big headed boy who once defeated Voldemort and was allowed liberties that no one else was allowed. What if Harry really was delusional and DD was cracking up? Percy isn't at Hogwarts to see. He is in the Ministry surrounded by people of power who believe the 'what ifs' as facts. A boy raised in near poverty with high ambitions is likely to run the course of Percy in OoP. I don't think we need to suspect Imperius Curses or magical influence for Percy's actions to be validated. -Tonks ========Original Message======== Subj: [HPforGrownups] Re: Percey Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? Date: 11/18/2003 16:16:06 PM Eastern Standard Time From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Reply-to: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sent from the Internet (Details) I've snipped out everyone's comments--sorry. Many people seem to think Percy was under the Imperius curse performed by Lucius all through OOP. The question I have is WHY. What value would there be to perform this curse? Lucius and Fudge are very close. If LM wanted info about MOM dealings, he could probably just ask. I don't see that as a compelling reason. If LM wanted info on the Order, why would he make Percy sever ties with his family. That just doesn't make any sense. I don't see Percy acting out of character. I believe he's just a bit more comfortable to be himself now that he's out of his parents nest. I see a lot of kids that remain strongly under their parents influence after coming of age. Then, after a bit of time has passed, realize that they are truly in control of themselves and feel free to bolt away from their parents. I don't find it strange at all that Percy "comes into his own" in OOP. Just my thoughts -Hermowninny ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 18 21:25:00 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:25:00 -0000 Subject: The Evans Theory In-Reply-To: <20031118194014.71369.qmail@web25109.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85376 Udder Pendragon: > Mark Evans doesn't have to live in Little Whinging. there aer a lot of places in the UK where if you move a mile you will pass through three seperately named areas. If the MoM looked in Greater, Lesser, Middle, Upper Lower, Nether or any other of at least a dozen on the same theme. They may well have found him. > Geoff: True. I hadn't thought of this one. There is also the question whether Little Whinging is particularly rural (see also below). The reason for my saying this is that my local secondary school - the West Somerset Community College (in Minehead) - has the second largest catchment area of any similar school in the UK, about 400 square miles. Pupils come from up to twenty miles away. But. And there has to be a but! Harry sees Dudley and his gang around the local park. They appear to hang around there. Harry says to Dudley, "I know you did Mark Evans two nights ago." How did he know? Seeing? Also "neighbourhood children all around were terrified of him..." (OOTP p.15 UK edition) It seems that Dudley & Co hang around the village/suburb/estate in the evenings and bash up the local kids. It also appears not to be a small village: "...the only sound that of the low grumble of traffic on the road beyond the park railings." (OOTP p.15 UK edition) So, by my reasoning, Mark Evans very likely lives in Little Whinging. QED. Geoff From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 21:29:05 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:29:05 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85377 Anne wrote: > I don't think this is likely though. The Weasleys strike me as the type > that would at least have a picture of a dead son displayed in their home, > rather than trying to completely erase his memory. We haven't seen any such > picture, or anything else indicating that this may be the case. I too would have expected one of the Weasleys to mention him by now. They're a pretty brave and practical group. I'm not trying to trivialze the pain of losing a child or a sibling, but I don't see why we wouldn't have seen or heard something about him at some point. JJPandy's wrote in 85336: >At what age is a child old enough to experience the death of someone >so that they can see the Theastrals? Harry was one year old and >present at his mother's murder, yet he did not see the Theastrals >until after he saw Cedric die. Does this mean that you have to be >old enough to understand that a death has occurred? Regarding, Ron and the Thestrals, I thought someone had to see someone die. For example, Harry saw Cedric die right in front of him. Harry may not have seen his mother die. He remembers her voice and a flash of green light, but we don't know if Harry actually saw her blasted by AK. Yolanda From rredordead at aol.com Tue Nov 18 21:49:45 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:49:45 -0000 Subject: Percey Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85378 > Hermowninny wrote: > Many people seem to think Percy was under the Imperius curse > performed by Lucius all through OOP. The question I have is WHY. > What value would there be to perform this curse? > Lucius and Fudge are very close. If LM wanted info about MOM > dealings, he could probably just ask. I don't see that as a > compelling reason. Now me: Trust me, in politics and business no one is that close. Fudge loves Lucius for his money; Lucius loves Fudge for his position of power and influence. Either would have the other killed if necessary, while smiling holding a baby. And I think they are both intelligent enough to know it. If Lucius started asking difficult and intimate questions about the Ministry's business,Fudge would become highly suspicious and I imagine would begin to close off to Lucius in order to protect his position of power. If you are trying your damnedest to control someone as important as the Minister of Magic, as I think Lucius is, you need to have all you bases covered. It is not enough to simply be 'friends' with the minister. You've got to be two or three step ahead of him at all times and have some dirt on him as well, as back up incase he starts to squeeze you out. Lucius need all the information he can get on that man. Personally I doubt he has just Percy under control but others in the ministry as well. > Hermowninny wrote: > If LM wanted info on the Order, why would he make Percy sever ties > with his family. That just doesn't make any sense. Me again: Because the control of Percy has nothing to do with obtaining info on the Order. Voldemort has other spies in place for that job. Or at least he should have. Percy is being used to get information on the Ministry at this point in time. That might change later. Voldemort is extending his control and power into many places. The Order, the Ministry, Hogwarts, Gringots Bank are all at risk if the Dark Lord is as intelligent as I hope he is. Mandy From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 21:58:19 2003 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 21:58:19 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory (longish) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85379 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > Dumbledore appears to choose Vernon and Petunia for two > reasons. "They're the only family he has now." (PS p.15 all quotes > UK editions). Geoff I'll have to go home and look at that. It seems like all the quotes here have quoted only the first part, "They're the only family he has." Period. Full stop. And then there's your quote with that most interesting word on the end. "They're the only family he has **now**." Time turners exist. **When** else did Harry have family that has *now* arrived in LW? Could ME be an ancestor or, (gulp), a descendant? THe whole ME thing is too coincidental to be merely a coincidence. I just read a short review of the "Clues to Book 5" book, and some of the "rules" they live by is that 1) there are no coincidences, 2) characters lie or are mistaken, except that Hermione is right unless she's emotional and Ron is wrong unless he's joking, 3) if it's reinforced, JKR wants us to remember it, and 4) if it's interrupted, it's important. That whole ME episode was interrupted by two rather nasty Dementors. TK -- Tigerpatronus From patientx3 at aol.com Tue Nov 18 22:24:44 2003 From: patientx3 at aol.com (HunterGreen) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 22:24:44 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85380 Jen Reese" wrote: > On several different threads I've seen comments about how someone > couldn't be evil because they were in Gryffindor, or that person > *is* evil so they must have been in Slytherin. > [snip] > I'd like to find out > MWPP were in Slytherin or someone from Gryffindor is a betrayer. > Meaning all the houses have postitive and negative characteristics, > and that being in a certain house doesn't predetermine your entire > existence. But by saying that MWPP were in Slytherin you're endorsing the whole 'mean=Slytherin' idea. Of the four of them are any particularily ambitious? I will agree that Peter isn't exactly brave, but he could be in the future (others have pointed out that it was brave to argue with VD in the opening chapter of GoF, which I agree with). Look what Phineas says about Slytherins in OoP (chpt23) "It looks to me as though you would have been better off in my own house. We Slytherins are brave, yes, but not stupid. For instance, given the choice, we will always choose to save our own necks." Maybe Peter fits in to that criterea, but Lupin and (especially) Sirius and James don't fit into that at all. In the flashbacks Harry has in PoA, he hears James saying he'll 'hold VD off', he and Lily went into hiding for Harry, not themselves (and since both of those relate to someone saving their own child), there's the infamous prank incident. Then there's Sirius, who--after Lily and James died--he cared more about avenging them by killing Peter than going to DD and trying to save his innocence (when he escapes from jail its the same thing). Then of course in OoP, he rushes out to save Harry despite being TOLD to stay behind (for his own safety, as far as anyone *seeing* him goes), which of course leads to his death, quite the opposite of 'saving his own neck'. There haven't been any real references to Sirius or James having careers, (Sirius, at least, is wealthy b/c of inheritence) so they lack any sort of career ambition. They were both in the OoP, which is more brave than ambitious (especially since back in those days they were outnumbered and many of the members were killed). Personally, I see MWPP as the examples of Gryffindors who aren't perfect. As far as Slytherin goes....we do have Snape, and there are two more books left for Harry to meet the rest of the Slytherins in his year. -HunterGreen From sanityescapesme1979 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 22:17:43 2003 From: sanityescapesme1979 at yahoo.com (sanityescapesme1979) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 22:17:43 -0000 Subject: Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85381 I do believe Neville will play an important role in the future books. He will either be the one to murder Bellatrix, save someone, or find a cure for his parents. I believe JKR should let Neville be the one to torture and kill Bellatrix since she was the one who made his parents insane. I cried when I read the part when he was in the hospital visting them. The reason why I believe he will save someone or find a cure for his parents is because it's mentioned he is good at herbology. It has to mean something; why else mention it in almost every book? Also, my question is: what is the deal with the plant he recieved for his birthday (fifth book pg.186 American version) Mimbulus mimbletonia? He says it himself it does a lot of things. Also, it's the password to get in to Gryffindor Tower. SanityEscapesMe1979 From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Tue Nov 18 22:58:29 2003 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 22:58:29 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85382 The tag line is stolen from another post that I read a couple days ago, and I loved the image so much that I had to steal it. Sorry, out there, whoever it was, but it is such a lovely image. It has been stated before in this group that LV is too cartoonish, too outlandish, with his crimson, slit-pupil eyes and albino skin and swirling capes, to be the *real* evil villian. Let us, for the purposes of this thread, assume this is so. But who, then, is the real villian, who is truly the enemy? Some offerings: Lucius Malfoy: who may be pulling Fudge's strings at the MoM. Fudge: who isn't as thick as he seems to be. Dumbledore: who gives Harry just enough info to make the wrong decision every time, and in whose eyes that enigmatic triumph glinted upon LV's return to the corporal. Who else? Who else? TK -- Tigerpatronus From mpjdekker at hotmail.com Tue Nov 18 23:08:01 2003 From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 23:08:01 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85383 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > > > > My second point, which is more germane to Harry, is that, in "The > Last Battle", the characters' POV goes over with them into the new > heaven. As I said a day or so ago, if Harry dies, then there has to > be an awkward shift in the POV at this point. If it were to happen > then whether we switch to an authorial/narrative view would have to > be seen. I realise that there are books where the leading character > dies and the point of view is carried up to that point ("A Tale of > Two Cities" comes to mind) but the narrative stops there. For Harry > to die and the book come to a full stop seems to be unlikely; it > would be too abrupt and would lack a full closure. > > Geoff But there have already been instances in the HP books where other points of view were used. The first chapter of PS/SS was mostly from the perspective of Uncle Vernon, and the first chapter of GoF was a combination of an all-knowing and Frank Bryce's point of view. I'm sorry, but the limited third person POV used by JKR will not save Harry from dying. Maus (who loves a good drama with plenty of deaths) From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Nov 18 23:13:30 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 23:13:30 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85384 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "HunterGreen" wrote: > But by saying that MWPP were in Slytherin you're endorsing the > whole 'mean=Slytherin' idea. Jen R: How, exactly? Do you think of the MWPP as mean people? I don't. My point was that we know for sure (except for Wormtail) that the others were not evil or DE's. So for Sirius, James and Lupin to be in Slytherin, that would discount that all Slytherins are evil. HunterGreen: Of the four of them are any > particularily ambitious? I will agree that Peter isn't exactly brave, > but he could be in the future (others have pointed out that it was > brave to argue with VD in the opening chapter of GoF, which I agree > with). Look what Phineas says about Slytherins in OoP (chpt23) > > "It looks to me as though you would have been better off in my own > house. We Slytherins are brave, yes, but not stupid. For instance, > given the choice, we will always choose to save our own necks." > > Maybe Peter fits in to that criterea, but Lupin and (especially) > Sirius and James don't fit into that at all. Jen R: It's not that I don't think MWPP have characteristics of Gryffindors, I just wouldn't be *surprised* to find out they were Slytherin. Slytherins are resourceful, determined, and have "a certain disregard for rules" as DD tells Harry in COS (US, chap. 18, p. 333). Becoming illegal animagi certainly fits that description. Making a complex Map of Hogwarts was certainly resourceful. And the Order is, if nothing else, full of resourceful people with a certain disregard for the rules! They are all extremely brave, too, and obviously willing to die for their cause. If the MWPP were in Slytherin, they obviously channeled their cunning and detrmination for a cause greater than saving their own necks--and that would make my point that a person sorted at age 11 still makes choices on how to use their strongest characteristics. So, I do think there's evidence MWPP could have been in Slytherin and would even go so far as to say their friendship and efforts in that house actually led to them being extremely resourceful in the Order later on. From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Tue Nov 18 23:29:45 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 23:29:45 -0000 Subject: I *love* tragic endings ! (Was : Re: What if Harry dies?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85385 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "susanbones2003" wrote: "I never said, as Annemehr pointed out, I needed a happy ending with Harry going off into the sunset. I never mentioned how children will view this. I merely noted that people care so much for Harry that they will be devastated if he dies. And if he must, I hope it's so clearly necessary and justified sso that we can all accept it. Jennifer" What if Harry dies? Oh, that's a big question I've been reading nearly all the posts concerning that thread, and in my own mind it's not very clear. It wasn't an easy post to write, and I wondered whether I would put it on the board. However, after reading Jennifer's message, I decided to send what is following. It's rather hard on the Wizarding World, and rather partial, I confess. So if I ever hurt the members who see it as an ideal society, if I'm clumsy, I apologize. It's not very easy to talk about death, even in the case of an imaginary boy. Harry Dead or alive at the end of the story? On one hand, I would try to accept it if he died, though I would be sad .He makes me cry when he's in a hard situation, for example at the end of OotP; I don't think I will laugh if he doesn't survive. In order to have "a well prepared mind" concerning his potential death, I use to think that if Harry died, he would join some other characters that I love (Hamlet, Don Juan, Don Quijote, Frodo ), and he would share with them the respect we tend to owe to dead heroes. I would keep on reading the series, just the same way I keep on reading Shakespeare, Tirso de Molina or Moli?re's plays, Cervantes and Tolkien's novels: because they are much more than combinations of stories and characters. There's also the way the artists wrote them, there's what we could call "the work of art miracle", that repeats indefinitely. Thanks to this "miracle", we know that we can leave Frodo, Don Juan, Don Quijote or Hamlet go, just because we also know that we'll meet them again. True heroes never vanish completely; we can bring them back every time we need them. We know we can shut the books; we can open them another time and the magic of verb will go on. It will be the same with Harry, who already belongs to legend. On the other hand, I would be glad if I could shut the book saying "He did it, he survived". However, I'm not sure this ending would be as satisfying to him as we could imagine. First, as Joseph Campbell wrote, it's difficult to a hero to find his own place in the world he saved. Actually, he is not in the same world anymore, because the initiation he went through put him in another dimension. When Harry defeats Voldemort, he will be definitely different from his friends and from the other wizards. How will he live among people who will treat him like a phenomenon? Who will always demand perfection from him? His closest friends (if they survive ) will certainly treat him "normally", but the others won't. He will have very few rights ( right to weakness, to mistake ) and a lot of duties. Any example? Look at what happens in the first book when he makes Gryffindor loose points: his mates from the Quidditch Team don' call him by his name anymore. He's only "the seeker", just as if he didn't deserve the name "Harry Potter" anymore. He doesn't fit with the representation the others had of him, he is not as he must be, and he has to cope with their grief. The Wizarding World doesn't want Harry to betray his own legend while he's only a child. It will be worse when he manages to defeat completely Voldemort. He will have to be a model, or a symbol; he will not be allowed to be "just Harry". That's for the first option. And there's another option that makes me wonder whether he will be happy in the world he will have saved: it's a world with a very short memory. Look at what happens to Dumbledore: he's not as popular as he should be. He defeated Grindelwald. He's "the only one Voldemort ever feared". Do wizards treat him well for all that? Not precisely. Some say he's a nutter, some say he's too old, or think he would be able to take the power. They don't trust him; it appears clearly in the fifth book. At the end of OotP, of course, he's given back his credit, but only because the others fear Voldemort. Now they want him to save the day and are ready to treat him obsequiously. I bet that they will do the same with Harry after Voldemort's defeat. He will only have the right to help them if they need him, and shut up the rest of the time. Yes, it's a world with a very short memory. If it wasn't, Voldemort wouldn't be there. But they forgot how it was in Grindelwald's time; they didn't want to recognize their responsibility in the existence of Dark Magic. And so it went on when Voldemort appeared. They didn't even try to change their rules when Harry defeated him once. They kept on tolerating verbal and social discrimination (no matter if the pure bloods use such an unacceptable expression as "mud blood"; no matter if Lupin can't find a job because of his disease; no matter if the newspaper wipes the ground with Hagrid because he's half giant; no matter if houses elves are slaves ) They didn't modify their justice (Hagrid went to Azkaban only because they suspected him of being responsible for what was happening at Hogwarts; they denied him a trial, just as they did with Sirius). They kept on encouraging rivalry in their schools (the Four Houses Cup tradition, the Triwizard Tournament ). To cut a long story short, they didn't take the opportunity to close the door to Dark Magic, to cut off all that makes it possible (discrimination, injustice, hatred ), maybe because they didn't want to put their society into question. They needed to consider the reasons why Voldemort had become so powerful, and act in such a way it wouldn't happen anymore, but they didn't do anything. It was in their power to make things change, but they didn't move at all. They were happy with that small child who had defeated the Dark Lord, and with Dumbledore who was still there, just in case. "Everything is for the best I the best of the worlds", as Voltaire wrote ironically. Wizards probably didn't want to see that evil is never very far, even from normality, and that not speaking its name is not enough to keep it away. Now, Voldemort is back. They expect Dumbledore to protect them, and if he dies, they will certainly expect Harry to save the day. Shouldn't they first ask themselves what they can do, instead of waiting and fearing like children? And who will face the next Dark Lord (a job for Draco?) after Harry? For they can be sure there will be another one, if they stay on the same road I recognize that I'm not very kind with the Wizarding World tonight, and some could say that I'm not very fair either. I'd like to say that JKR herself isn't very kind with the WW. I was re- reading "Fantastic Beasts and where to find them" before writing this post, and it's clear that she criticises the incredibly slow way wizard use to make legislation: they started trying to define which creatures had the right to be "citizens" of the Wizarding World in the 14th century, and they didn't manage to find a more or less acceptable solution until 1811. "Chi va piano va sano?". Maybe, but meanwhile, Voldemort and C? are free to say and to do what they want. And as a conclusion, I confess: Harry is my pet, and I would feel disgusted if he died but people like Fudge could keep on ruling the Wizarding World. It would mean that his sacrifice would have been in vain, that the story would repeat, with other Dark Lords and other sacrifices, just because the Wizarding World didn't draw a lesson from what happened. Harry has to grow up spiritually; he has to learn, to improve, and to overpass his own errors. Why should he be the only one in the Wizarding World? And would the Wizarding World deserve Harry's sacrifice, if it didn't change anything at all? Amicalement, Iris From belijako at online.no Tue Nov 18 23:49:16 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 23:49:16 -0000 Subject: Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85386 sanityescapesme1979 wrote: > I do believe Neville will play an important role in the future books. > He will either be the one to murder Bellatrix, save someone, or find > a cure for his parents. I believe JKR should let Neville be the one > to torture and kill Bellatrix since she was the one who made his > parents insane. Me: I also hope Neville with his Herbology knowledge will find a cure for his parents. But I can't really understand why you want Rowling to have him torture and kill Bellatrix... Can you really see Neville doing such a thing? What makes the "good" guys different from the "bad" guys is their CHOICES and what they DO. What makes Dumbledore different from Voldemort is that he is not willing to use any means to get what he wants. Because he's got integrity and principles. Dumbledore chooses not to use his powers in certain ways... If Neville is on the good side like him, he will not torture anyone just to satisfy his need for revenge. That's not the way good guys operate :-) Just my two knuts. That's also the reason I got worried when Harry tried to "torture" Bellatrix in the MoM. Harry needs to be careful and think through if he really wants his hatred to control him like that. If he doesn't, he might end up as Voldemort II... Berit From jtdogberry at hotmail.com Wed Nov 19 00:10:19 2003 From: jtdogberry at hotmail.com (jtdogberry) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 00:10:19 -0000 Subject: Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85387 > sanityescapesme1979 wrote: > > > I do believe Neville will play an important role in the future > books. > > He will either be the one to murder Bellatrix, save someone, or > find > > a cure for his parents. Berit wrote: If Neville is on the good side like him, he will not torture > anyone just to satisfy his need for revenge. That's not the way good Me: I agree with Berit, Neville will not torture Bellatrix, he won't sink to her level. I think the problem with his Gran is that she can't let go to what happened to her son. She is trying to make Neville into Frank and not seeing Neville as his own person. I think the person to be wary of is Great Uncle Algie. I don't trust him; after all, he dropped an eight year old out of a second story window and giving him a very rare plant no t mention Trevor something is going on there. I see Neville's role in the future books as the unsung hero, he will be there for people when they need him but will no be the leader. I would like to see Neville becomes a teacher or a healer. I don't want him to become an auror, it will feel like he is living up to his Gran's and indeed the rest of his family exceptions rather then his own. TTFN Dogberry From jamielynncarlson at hotmail.com Wed Nov 19 00:18:47 2003 From: jamielynncarlson at hotmail.com (lynnfaragher78) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 00:18:47 -0000 Subject: Subject: Re: Ron's dead brother....or sister Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85388 Well......here is my 2 cents, the reason may be that because of Lord Thingy there weren't too many people having to oppertunity nor the energy...mmmmmm....nor urge for baby makeing.... If there was a possiable child that was born and passed away....wouldn't have Molly seen that when she was with the bogart? Lynn p.s. ....... sorry if this was said already From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 01:05:54 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 01:05:54 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85389 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Florentine Maier" > wrote: > > > > I think the jinx could go something like that: "Everybody who > > takes the job of DADA-teacher will come to grief because of > > his/her greatest weakness within a year." > > > > Cases in point: > > Quirrell: Weak will > > Lockhard: Vanity > > Lupin: Being a werewolf > > Moody: Paranoia > > Umbridge: Imperiousness > > > Jen R.: > > Hmmm...I think this is very good! Don't know if you're the > first to theorize it, but I've personally never heard it before. > > ...edited... > > ...DD knowingly brought Lupin and the person he believed to be Moody > into a jinxed position. ... > > I like it! bboy_mn: I don't think that the position DADA teacher is jinxed in the sense of a curse. That is, a curse/jinx specifically cast by a person. I think it is jinxed more in the sense of being surrounded by an aura of Bad Luck. Let's not forget that Harry played a hand in the down fall of every DADA teacher since he first started school. One could infer that the 'jinx' on the position is Harry himself. Certainly, you've heard of people who are a jinx; they bring bad luck with them where ever they go. So, without Harry around to amplify their weaknesses, the DADA teachers may have been able to get by. I suspect that once Harry is gone from the school, the 'magnet' that has been drawing bad luck to the job will be gone too. However, I must amend that by pointing out that with the exception of Lupin, all the DADA teachers were either incompetent or their integrity was seriously compromised. Either way, they were corrupted in ways that almost guaranteed their doom. Just a thought. bboy_mn From offworld_xanatos at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 00:10:42 2003 From: offworld_xanatos at yahoo.com (xani) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 00:10:42 -0000 Subject: In Defence Of Lupin In-Reply-To: <140.1cc57dce.2ceb2fe5@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85390 Thank you tonks for a wonderful defense of our favorite warewolf! It really makes me sad that so many people are so suspicious of someone BECAUSE he seems so nice. 'Nice? Compassionate? He's obviously hiding some hideous evil!' ;-) No, I believe that JKR wrote Lupin to be the nice guy. I just can't believe otherwise. One thing you didn't mention tonks, was something JKR said in an interview. While it certainly isn't true canon, it does come from JKR herself, so that gives it quite a bit of weight in my book: When asked who is her favorite teacher at Hogwarts, JKR answered 'Lupin'. She went on to say that if she would love to have Lupin as a teacher for her own children. And she even mentions that McGonagall is just too strict for her! Now if JKR said that Lupin was her 'favorite character' in the series, I would be leary. Perhaps he did have something up his sleeve. But, JKR shows us a compassionate, fun, creative teacher who is good at what he does. She then goes on to say that Lupin would be a good enough teacher for her own children. ESE? Impossible. Lupin is what he is. xani (who wonders if JKR realizes what she wrote in all these single, male characters - Snape, Sirius, Lupin - who are in so obvious need of regular hugs! Was she just begging for fan-fic? ;) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 01:53:10 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 01:53:10 -0000 Subject: Head Boy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85391 lola > > The reason I think Harry will be head boy has very little to do with > grades. It is pretty obvious that Voldie-war 2 will come to a head > in Harry's seventh year, it has to. In that seventh year the school > is going to need a strong leader. Dumbledore is not going to be > around ( I predict that Lord Thingy is going to try to take Hogwarts > in book 6, and that Dumbledore will die heroically, but thats another > post). I can't really see any of the other teachers truly taking his > place > > Harry has already proven his mettle as a leader, with the DA. More > importantly, people will follow him - despite intelligent objections, > Hermionie did follow Harry to the MoM in OOP. Furthermore, Harry is > the leader of the student 'light side:' the entire school already > knows what side he is on. They also know that he is a powerful > wizard via the numerous speeches Dumbledore has mentioned him in. > > (If)When Hogwarts is attacked, I feel that Harry will become > something of a 'rallying point' for the students. > I don't believe that Ernie McMillan (really the only other choice - > can you imagine Draco as head boy!?) has the same effect on people. > While he would certainly be an excellent administrative head boy, > that is not what is going to be required in book 7. > > lola I agree except for one small detail. I think Head Boy is an academic position better held by someone else. Certainly Harry needs to lead the battle when Hogwarts is besieged, and I agree that it will be, but he doesn't need to be Head Boy to do thatt. (BTW, he's going to have to take his N.E.W.T.S. with or without Dumbledore and with or without a war, but the last thing he needs is to be tied down by other school-related duties. Let Ernie have that job, holding down the administrative end while Harry leads the troops.) I still think that Head Boy is probably an automatically awarded position but I'm waiting to hear the arguments before pursuing the idea any further. Carol From melclaros at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 02:13:55 2003 From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 02:13:55 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85392 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Florentine Maier" wrote: > > I think the jinx could go something like that: "Everybody who takes > the job of DADA-teacher will come to grief because of his/her greatest > weakness within a year." > > Cases in point: > Quirrell: Weak will > Lockhard: Vanity > Lupin: Being a werewolf > Moody: Paranoia > Umbridge: Imperiousness > Something very like this started brewing in my head after reading the 'jinx' post. Dumbledore has said (according to JKR, since we've never actually 'heard' this, have we?) that he feared giving Severus the DADA position would 'bring out the worst in him'---let's continue that thought--the position would 'bring out the worst in him, as indeed it has everyone else who's held it'. So I begin to think that perhaps the bring-out-the-worst effect may not be Severus-specific at all. Mel, who thinks perhaps Snape didn't create the jinx, but might just want to turn it to his advantage. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 02:21:13 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 02:21:13 -0000 Subject: Mister Figg....? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85393 > Carol wrote: > > >At Harry's hearing, she gives her full name as Arabella Doreen > Figg. Either she omits her maiden name or she was never really > married. > >Sylvia: > > This doesn't follow. Although I believe it is customary for American > women to use their maiden names as well as their current surnames on > formal occasions, this is not true in England. Mrs. Figg, giving > evidence in an English court, would give only her Christian name, > middle names (if any) and her surname. Her maiden name is > irrelevant. I would agree that, if there ever was a Mr. Figg, he > hasn't been around for some time. She gives the impression of having > lived for a long while on her own. Mr. Figg, if he ever existed, is > either dead or has legged it long ago. Perhaps he couldn't stand all > those cats. Carol: Since you snipped a large part of my post, you may have misread the part you quoted, which is only a preliminary suggestion, not the main argument. You say that the maiden name is irrelevant; I say that either the maiden name is Figg or it's omitted. Either way, we agree that Figg is her married name if indeed she was married. (If she wasn't married, then Figg *is* her maiden name.) In the snipped portion of the post I arrive at the conclusion that she did, indeed, marry and that her husband was a muggle. My intention was to try to answer the poster who asked if we knew Mrs. Figg's maiden name. It appears that we don't, and neither does the MoM. If they did, they might have kept better track of her. Motto: If you're a female squib and don't want to disappear from the WW, marry a wizard. ;-) Carol From kcawte at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 19 10:33:57 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 02:33:57 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mister Figg....? References: Message-ID: <001901c3ae88$a38ae540$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 85394 > > Carol: > > Since you snipped a large part of my post, you may have misread the > part you quoted, which is only a preliminary suggestion, not the main > argument. You say that the maiden name is irrelevant; I say that > either the maiden name is Figg or it's omitted. Either way, we agree > that Figg is her married name if indeed she was married. (If she > wasn't married, then Figg *is* her maiden name.) In the snipped > portion of the post I arrive at the conclusion that she did, indeed, > marry and that her husband was a muggle. My intention was to try to > answer the poster who asked if we knew Mrs. Figg's maiden name. It > appears that we don't, and neither does the MoM. If they did, they > might have kept better track of her. Motto: If you're a female squib > and don't want to disappear from the WW, marry a wizard. ;-) > K Well of course she omitted it. She was stating her legal name for the record, her legal name wouldn't include her maiden name. Adding that her maiden name was whatever would probably have caused the judges to irritable suggest she stick to answering the questions she was asked (well if they're anything like muggle judges who don't like people wandering off the point). Why would anyone expect her to add it? Saying she omitted it, implies that it was information that was part of the answer but she didn't give it. So no we don't know her maiden name but she was definitely married. *shrugs* She's never struck me as likely to become an important character so I don't think it's ever likely to come up - of course I could be totally wrong and her name could turn out to have been Riddle or something and she'll have a vital role in the final battle. K From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 02:36:45 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 02:36:45 -0000 Subject: Reflections On That Mirror In-Reply-To: <4DF20021-19D3-11D8-8871-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85395 Kneasy wrote: > Harry sees family - at least ten others besides himself. He sees his > parents, he sees other pairs of green eyes, he sees noses like his and > a little old man who might have his knobbly knees. > > Noses? Knobbly knees? Has Harry's nose ever been described? If it has I > can't find it. But apparently it's distinctive enough to be recognised. > Knobbly knees - how about those? Not really. Closest is a scrawny boy > on a bucking broomstick in one of Snape's memories and another scrawny > newcomer that gets a mention. Not close enough. Carol responds: I can't believe I'm quoting canon to Kneasy, but here it is: "Harry had a thin face, knobbly knees, black hair, and bright green eyes" (SS 20). If you have PS, I can't give you the exact page reference, but near the beginning of Chapter 2, "The Vanishing Glass." The next two sentences describe the glasses held together by Scotch tape (this is the American edition, after all) and the lightning-shaped scar. Nothing about the nose, but the knobbly knees are there from the beginning. Something an eleven-year-old can relate to, I guess. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 03:14:17 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 03:14:17 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: <000801c3ade0$98d7b9a0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85396 Joj wrote: > We've been discussing whether Harry should die or not, but I think I have a slightly different reason for wanting Harry to live. > > First, let's imagine we have just finished reading the 7th book. No matter how great or exciting or fulfilling it may be, I ,for one, will certainly feel depressed. All questions should be answered (well major ones anyway). There will be no more clues to uncover and dissect and theorize endlessly. It will be the end of an enjoyable part of my life. > > Now, if we get Dead Harry, we won't even get to imagine his future. I want to be able to speculate and imagine and fantasize about Harry's future, based on clues from the epilogue. Fan-fictions wont be so fun without Harry, or "let's pretend he didn't die" theories or ghost Harry stories. What will all us Harry Potter freaks do with our free time? > > It would be so final, so finished, so depressing. > > I want Harry to live on and on and on..... > > Joj I think JKR would feel the same way, which is one reason I'm betting she won't kill Harry. It will be even harder for her to let go than for us, and she may find herself writing that eighth book after all. I hope she writes "A History of Hogwarts," at least. Think of the material that would provide for speculation, fantasy, and fan fic. I firmly believe that, whatever her rights as an author to determine her own protagonist's fate (and please, friends, don't give me that argument again because I already know what you're going to say), she'd be doing fandom a great disservice by killing Harry. Speaking solely for myself and not to argue with anyone, I don't want him to be killed. I don't want an LOTR-style, ending, either. Imagine having him sail off into the Uttermost West or some WW equivalent and having "Harry Lives!" posters in the London Underground and the New York City subways. And I don't want him to walk through the veil to some mysterious death that is "better" than life. No. Please. Just make him an auror, along with his best friends, and give him a reasonably normal but not a boring future, with a chance to accomplish something worthwhile. (I don't want him to be like Frodo, saving the Shire/WW for others but unable to find happiness there himself.) How about making him Minister of Magic, a reformer who brings justice to the WW legal system, which is badly in need of reform? No more corruption in the MoM, no more bribes from Lucius Malfoy and his ilk, no more expulsion for underage magic, no more imprisonment without trial, no more prisons where the prisoners go mad, no more estrangement from muggles. Well, I'm dreaming on that last one. But a happy ending that's both imaginative and unsentimental *is* possible, and would be a more significant literary accomplishment than yet another work in which the hero dies. Whatever the ending, it had better be satisfying to all of us because as Joj indicates, it's all we're going to get, alas! Carol, who is glad we have the HP films, uncanonical though they are, because otherwise it would be very hard to hold out till books 6 and 7 From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Nov 19 03:32:50 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 03:32:50 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85397 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > I suspect that once Harry is gone from the school, the 'magnet' that > has been drawing bad luck to the job will be gone too. However, I must > amend that by pointing out that with the exception of Lupin, all the > DADA teachers were either incompetent or their integrity was seriously > compromised. Either way, they were corrupted in ways that almost > guaranteed their doom. > Jen R: You know, I think even Lupin was undone in the end by his own weakness--cowardice, as he himself says in POA . He didn't want to risk Dumbledore's trust by telling him about the illegal animagi and the secret tunnels; those omissions led to the finale in the Shrieking Shack and ultimately, Lupin's fate. I don't see it as corruption so much as a character flaw, though. (And I'm still not convinved Quirrell's conversion was completely his doing--LV seems to be very *convincing* when needed....). But you get no argument from me on Crouch!Moody, Lockhart and Umbridge being deeply corrupt to begin with. From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 19 03:43:34 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 03:43:34 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85398 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says I think that was me, and thanks. I'm so over Voldemort! I can't believe "very few people know" he used to be Tom Riddle, or that people are still taking him seriously as many times as little kids have kicked his butt. Lucius Malfoy, of course, is the acting villain; he was commanding in the field at the Ministry battle. Not, of course, that I wouldn't love to see Dumbledore turn out to be the bad guy; it would be so different! --JDR From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 04:23:22 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 04:23:22 -0000 Subject: To clarify. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85399 nymphadoraotonks wrote: Carol brought up an interesting point and I want to address it before I fall down from sleep deprivation. I do NOT think Snape is horrible. michaeljacksonfan1970 responded: I don't think he is horrible either. Still, I don't think his motivations are all that clear, even after the last book. I can't wait to read your Snape defense, though. Tonks again: I stand by all my assessments of Snape in the past. I love Snape. I have called him many things. ( He will always be Sexy Snape to me) michaeljacksonfan1970: Sexy, huh? Why is that? None of the descriptions of him in the books are really that way. I always wonder if people who find Snape sexy have solid romantic relationships in their real lives. Or does their infatuation with Snape mean they like that personality type generally? > > ~Madeline For me, at least, real-life relationships have nothing to do with it, and I've never encountered Snape's personality in the RW so I don't know whether I'd be attracted to it--or him. If I could somehow enter the WW, I think I would be drawn by his cultivated voice and his obvious intelligence, not to mention the way he sweeps and glides down the corridors in his long cloak. I might be a bit daunted by the apparent coldness, but I would want to prove to him and to myself that I wasn't afraid of him, that, muggle or no muggle, I was in some ways his equal. The Jane Eyre/Rochester thing, maybe. There's an element of Gothic Romanticism about him. Even the black hair, black eyes, and pale skin suggest a Gothic or Byronic anti-hero. But he's not real, he's a literary character, so the attraction is different. It's not about whether I could have a romantic relationship with him (though I confess to a fantasy or two) but about figuring out who he is and why. He seems, more than the other characters, to belong to some earlier time. Harry and Hermione and the Weasleys, even to some degree Lupin and Sirius, have connections to the modern world. Snape doesn't. I can't imagine him riding a train or a motorcycle or wearing a watch. He's steeped in medievalism and mystery. Even the potions he so expertly brews are mysterious and he speaks about them almost poetically, and yet we sense that he really wants to be making better use of his prodigious talents by teaching DADA or perhaps escaping Hogwarts altogether. He was abused or neglected as a child, tormented and lonely as a teenager, and seduced (by Lucifer/Lucius?) into joining the dark side. He repented for mysterious reasons and now (mysteriously) has Dumbledore's trust. He became a spy for the good side "at great personal risk" but he's now stuck teaching Potions at a boarding school when he's not working (mysteriously) for the Order, loyal to Dumbledore yet hating his job and his students--in short, a man with a dark side who is somehow, mysteriously, on the side of good. So many unanswered questions about his past and future, so much to speculate about. He's endlessly compelling. Therre's also the fact that other people, those who take him at face value, don't like him. I don't know about Tonks or anyone else on this list, but I find men who are maligned by others fascinating and have an irresistible urge to defend them. (Keep me away from any Richard III lists or I'll never get any work done.) Needless to say, I'm looking forward to Tonks' defense, too. A toast to Snape. May he prove his worth and survive to the end of the series. Carol From stevejjen at earthlink.net Wed Nov 19 04:55:15 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 04:55:15 -0000 Subject: How is a Person 'Chosen' to Hear a Prophecy? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85400 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "M.Clifford" wrote: > The person who recieves the prophecy at the moment of receiving they > become its instrument through which it can be fulfilled. > > I am guessing this is the universal ethic of prophecy. The > Instrument must choose to do the deed with enough information to not > have been blind to the consequences. > > He doesn't put two and two together but thats the catch really isn't > it, the one DD is kicking himself over in OOTP. If you have all the > information but don't make the connection bad luck. Jen: Valky, I hope you're out there and I haven't waited too long to respond! Your idea of the Prophecy Instrument (PI) intrigues me. You mentioned the Prophecy threads over the summer, and I like your PI idea better because it allows for choice, even a poor choice. The line of thinking I remember this summer was that every action the *chosen* one takes is actually fulfilling the prophecy and that's why that person was chosen--that line of thinking had a more predeterministic feel to it. Valky: > It doesn't matter to (lets call it the Fates) "the Fates" because > their instrument has all the information he needs to make his own > choice. > > So post Harry making his discovery about Peter he is given the > choice to pave the prophecies way to fulfillment or end it. > > In this, I am also thinking that the person who overheard the first > prophecy was Snape. > I am seeing him as the P.I. of the first prophecy aside Dumbledore. > > His prescence in the shrieking shack revealed one truth to him, the > Pettigrew was indeed alive. As a prophecy instrument he had a choice > to pave the first prophecy or condemn it in that moment also. Jen: OK, I'm a little lost on this part. You're saying Dumbledore was chosen to hear the Prophecy and Snape to overhear *part* of it, (thus binding them together in a way--my thought). I'm lost though, about the Shrieking Shack. Snape was knocked out before Pettigrew was revealed. Are you saying Snape actually did believe Lupin/Sirius that Pettigrew was alive, perhaps he saw Pettigrew's name on the Map, then pretended he didn't believe Lupin/Sirius? How would that help pave the way for or condemn the First Prophecy? >Valky: > Firenze insists that Centaurs do not predict the future. > Is that a passive alliance of existentialism? is it why they are > contemptuous of humankind who would seek to know it then control it > for their own end. > > Do Centaurs conciously choose to avoid being the instruments of the > fates by not predicting the future because they know of the > Prophecy's Instrument law. Jen: I view the Prophecy as different from predicting the future, the way Trelawney does it, anyway. And Trelawney's type of divination is the one the Centaurs feel contempt for:"Sibyll Trelawney may have Seen, I do not know," continued Firenze..."but she wastes her time, in the main, on the self-flattering nonsense humans call fortune-telling." (OOTP, US, chap. 27, p. 603) But as for the Centaurs knowing the ethical imperatives of a Prophecy--they certainly seem to know more about the Fates than anyone else! Firenze said, "We watch the skies for the great tides of evil or change that are sometimes marked there. It may take ten years to be sure of what we are seeing." (OOTP, chap. 27, p. 603) That type of long-range "foretelling" certainly has more in common with the First Prophecy than divination--15 long years and still waiting to see how the Prophecy is fulfilled! From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 05:15:51 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 05:15:51 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85401 "Florentine Maier" wrote: I presume that it's not just a rumor but that the post is actually jinxed. I think the jinx could go something like that: "Everybody who takes the job of DADA-teacher will come to grief because of his/her greatest weakness within a year." Cases in point: Quirrell: Weak will Lockhard: Vanity Lupin: Being a werewolf Moody: Paranoia Umbridge: Imperiousness Carol: Interesting theory. Only one nitpick: The real Moody didn't lose the post because of paranoia. His paranoia was fully justified. He didn't teach because he was in a trunk under an Imperius curse, and strictly speaking, he didn't lose the post (though he didn't take it the following year, either). Imposter!Moody, OTOH, never intended to take the post for more than a year and said so at the welcoming feast in OoP, but he didn't expect to end his term as teacher quite the way he did. His greatest weakness would not be paranoia but--hm--Deception? Malice? Vengeance? Just being a murderous, conniving Death Eater? At any rate, he was altogether evil and even though he wasn't able to testify that Voldemort had returned, no one except possibly Voldemort is sorry that he's gone. Anyway, Wrong Moody, wrong weakness, but no effect on your theory over all. Jen: > > This theory would tie in nicely with why Dumbledore doesn't want > > Snape as DADA--there would be a real reason (other than the > > addiction theory which has never satisfied me) of why DD fears > Snape > > would turn to the Dark Arts again if he's the DADA teacher. > Catherine: > Jen's comment seems fair. HOwever I also wonder whether > rumour of the jinx could make Snape himself want the post _more_? He > could see it as an opportunity to overcome his weaknesses and prove > his worth once and for all, not least to himself. Carol: That's an interesting idea. We definitely need some way to explain why he would keep applying for the position for fourteen years after seeing teacher after teacher last only a year. my theory is that he really wants it and will receive it as his reward for service to Dumbledore, ending the jinx because the right person holds the post at last, but as you say, he could see the post itself as the way of proving his worth to Dumbledore. Someone suggested that he wants the position because the jinx would mean he'd be out of Hogwarts at the end of the year, not dead or fired but somehow able to resign because of the jinx. I do think he feels limited at Hogwarts, but I don't think Dumbledore will let him go. Part of their arrangement seems to be for Snape to teach at Hogwarts. Maybe at first it prevented him from going back to the dark side and now it provides him with some degree of protection from Voldemort. But if he were to leave Hogwarts at the end of Book 7, I wonder where else he could go (other than rejoining the dark side, which I'm sure he won't do). Maybe the Department of Mysteries could use his talents. But whatever his reasons for reapplying and whether the jinx is real or not, I think we can safely predict that we'll see yet another DADA teacher in Book 6. Unless that person is Snape, and I don't think it will be (yet), he or she won't last the year. Carol From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 19 05:32:05 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 05:32:05 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85402 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tigerpatronus" wrote: > It has been stated before in this group that LV is too cartoonish, too outlandish, with his crimson, slit-pupil eyes and albino skin and swirling capes, to be the *real* evil villian. Let us, for the purposes of this thread, assume this is so. > > But who, then, is the real villian, who is truly the enemy? > > Some offerings: > > Who else? Who else? > EverSoEvil!Lupin, naturally. I suspect his knowledge of the Dark Arts is even deeper than Voldemort's, that he, like Lucius, believes he can control Voldemort, and that Voldemort allows both Lupin and Lucius to believe this is so. Pippin who has just noticed that Lupin and Lucius have the same first syllable, which is probably the weakest ESE! argument she has ever made From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 05:39:18 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 05:39:18 -0000 Subject: Neville's Gran In-Reply-To: <008d01c3ae31$90ef2c90$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85403 The attributions are confusing on the previous post, so forgive me if I have them wrong. Joj wrote: I am very suspicious of his [Neville's] Grandmother. I think she's spent her time making Neville clumsy and forgetful and think she almost got away with passing off as a squib, until his uncle ruined it by dropping him out the window. "Kathryn Cawte"wrote: this part of your theory could be true even without her being Evil!Gran, she could be verly-Protective-&-Ever-So-Slightly-Nuts!Gran. Maybe she's (consciously or subconsciously) trying to make sure Neville never thinks of doing anything at all heroic and getting himself killed, he is after all pretty much all she has left of her son. She lost her son and daughter-in-law to Voldemort (and possibly her husband - for a race who have longer lifespans than muggles there are suspiciously few wizarding grandparents around, maybe a sign of how destructive the last war against V was) so she desperately wants to keep Neville safe. Carol: I tend to agree with Kathryn. I also think that the grandmother (unlike Mark Evans) is a genuine red herring, someone who could be the bad guy who is keeping the Longbottoms from being cured but is in fact innocent. Just as readers were set up to suspect Snape in SS/PS, we're being set up to suspect Neville's gran--only the clues and the mysteries are more sophisticated now. I think that formidable as she is, Gran is on the good side and woe to any Death Eaters if they go near her, especially if they happened to be named Lestrange. She's a lot more interesting and admirable than the late Mrs. Black, anyway. Maybe there's some sonnection between her and Luna, given their taste in hats. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 05:51:18 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 05:51:18 -0000 Subject: Red and Green and Gold and Silver:(Was: Harry's green eyes) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85404 > Kirstini wrote: Well, Harry's jet of light is red because it comes from the Expelliarumus spell, whereas Voldemort's is green because it's an Avada Kedavra. Harry's earliest memory: jets of green light=bad. Then he gets to Hogwarts where green = Slytherin = Draco = enemy. I don't know if we have it anywhere else in canon that Expelliarumus is a red jet though - we know that Stupefy is. Someone flag down a passing L.O.O.N? Annemehr responded: Aw, we don't need an actual L.O.O.N.! I just went to the first time we saw the spell cast, at the Duelling Club meeting: "[...] Snape cried: 'Expelliarmus!' There was a dazzling flash of scarlet light and Lockhart was blasted off his feet: [...]" Annemehr who loves that scene; silly wand waving, indeed -- that was a blast of pure *power!* Carol: Thanks, both of you. (I'm the one who posed the question about wand lights vs. eye colors.) I feel considerably more enlightened now. It appears, though I haven't made any effort to verify it, that defensive spells cast a red or scarlet light and offensive/dark arts/illegal spells cast a green light. We know that Avada Kedavra does, at any rate. What about Cruciatus and Imperius? Also thanks to Annemehr for the Snape quote. And people wonder why we think he's sexy! Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 06:03:15 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 06:03:15 -0000 Subject: Harry and Mark (WasThe Whole Evans Theory/Time Turner) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85405 Audrey wrote: > Others have mentioned that Mark is a name that can be thought of > as 'being marked' as Harry is marked. I know someone who loves to > look at name meanings in the Potter books and here is another way to > look at Mark. > ~~~ > > MARK (Evans): > Mark, a 1-syllable boy's name of Latin origin, means: Warlike; a > warrior. > Originating from: Swedish/Traditional meaning: Warring > Originating from: Latin/Traditional meaning: Hammer > Originating from: English/Traditional meaning: "Of Mars; the god of > war." Form of Marcus. (Mark/Marcus: Latin name of uncertain > derivation. Most believe it has its root in Mars, the name of the > Roman mythological god of war, and is therefore given the > meaning "war-like). > > HARRY (Evans) Potter: > Harry/Princely > Harold, Harry, Harris Anglo Saxon/ /Power > Harry English/A variant of Henry meaning home or house protector. > Also can be a diminutive of Harold: 'Army commander.'. Army. > Harry German Form of Harold/Army-Power > Harry Norse/War chief. > Harry Swedish/Swedish form of Henry 'rules the home'. > Harry Teutonic/Mighty in war. > Originating from: English/Traditional meaning: Army man > Originating from: Norse/Traditional meaning: War chief > Originating from: Teutonic/Traditional meaning: Mighty in war > Originating from: Swedish/Traditional meaning: Swedish form of > Henry "rules the home" > Harry, a 2-syllable boy's name of Teutonic/Old English origin, means: > Head of the house; warrior. > > ~~~ > Harry and Mark. Both names have a *war* meaning. > Very interesting, especially given JKR's often-expressed interest in names. As a side note, if Harry = Henry, England has had eight kings with that name (not to mention Prince Harry, who's third in line for the throne at the moment and Harold the Saxon, the last Saxon king of England, killed in battle by the Norman invaders--hopefully not an indication of Harry's fate). I don't know if there's any connection, but I decided to throw that in for what it's worth. Carol From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 06:12:02 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 06:12:02 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: <20031118191212.75406.qmail@web20002.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85406 Rebecca Stephens wrote: I'm not saying that > what he believes is inconsistant (though it is) but > that his behavior is inconsistent. In GOF, he > believed "Crouch." But he was very cool and unruffled > and dignified. In OOTP he is excited and emotional > and frankly very weird. That's the incosistant part > to me. Erin: Cool, unruffled, and dignified? What about during the Quidditch World Cup? Here, I'll quote some lines: "Mr. Crouch?" said Percy, suddenly abandoning his look of poker-stiff disapproval and positively writhing with excitement. and "Mr. Crouch!" said Percy breathlessly, sunk into a kind of half-bow that made him look like a hunchback. "Would you like a cup of tea?" and Percy jumped to his feet so often that he looked as though he were trying to sit on a hedgehog. When Cornelius Fudge, the Minister of Magic himself, arrived, Percy bowed so low that his glasses fell off and shattered. Highly embarrassed, he repaired them with his wand and thereafter remained in his seat, throwing jealous looks at Harry, whom Cornelius Fudge had greeted like an old friend. Erin: Don't get me wrong, I like Percy, but his behavior is consistant. It has progressed to new heights in OoP, but you can't say the groundwork wasn't laid. Erin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 06:46:08 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 06:46:08 -0000 Subject: - The Gang of Slytherins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85407 > Jen R: I've been trying to think of other > people we know from the Snape/MWPP era, but except for the > Longbottoms, we don't know general ages of the people Moody points > out in the original Order photo--the Prewett brothers, Benjy > Fenwick, the Bones, Marlene Mckinnon, etc. ...Andromeda Tonks and > Bertha Jorkins are probably too old for Snape's gang, although the > quote doesn't specifically say the 'gang' was Snape's same year, > just from Slytherin. In fact, it seems more likely he hung around > with an older crowd like Lucius and his friends (perhaps Bella, > Lestranges, etc?)since Malfoy and Snape know each other so well. > > It's a mystery--imagine that!! Carol: I've said this before but my thoughts seem to become lost or forgotten as people respond to other parts of my posts, so please forgive me for saying it again. I'm sure you're right that the "gang of Slytherins" was for the most part older than Snape, who entered Hogwarts already knowing as many curses as they did. They may have been protective of the greasy-haired, skinny little boy who was nevertheless markedly intelligent and gifted, but they were apparently not around in his fifth year to help him fend off James and Sirius. By that time he seems to have become a loner. Also, doesn't Sirius indicate somewhere that Bellatrix is about three years older than he is? That would make her three years older than Snape as well, and her husband is probably the same age or a little older. (I'm still wondering about his brother Rabastan, mentioned in another post. Anyone for an analysis of that name and its possible significance?) As for Andromeda, maybe she was a Gryffindor since her family cut her out of the tapestry. I'm guessing that she was about the same age as Lucius Malfoy, who married her (younger?) sister. Speaking of whom, I think we can safely add Narcissa to the Slytherin gang, but again older than Snape. As for the members of the Order in that photograph, we know even less about them, virtually nothing except their names and in some cases, who killed them or sent them to St. Mungo's. The Longbottoms will hear more about, certainly. And what about Aberforth Dumbledore? It's a safe bet that he wasn't from the Snape/MWPP era! Carol P.S. I keep catching references to a "mole" or spy in the Order, not Snape but someone spying for the *other* side. It can't be Percy, who has distanced himself from his family and would be a very junior member of the Order if they let him in. Who are the suspects? Mundungus Fletcher? Who else might it be? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 06:55:10 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 06:55:10 -0000 Subject: The Gang of Slytherins In-Reply-To: <1c7.11e3fa3f.2cebd9ca@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85408 lucky_kari writes: > > > No big correction, but on another note it was "a gang of Slytherins: > > almost all of whom became Death Eaters." Now we know Avery, Rosier, > > Wilkes and the Lestranges did become DEs, and I've always wanted to > > know more about them, but more and more I'm wondering *who* didn't? > > Which person/people who hung out with Snape in Slytherin didn't join > > Voldemort? > > > > Could be, but keep in mind that when Sirius said this, he wasn't sure that > Snape himself had been a DE. > > Amber Another point, touched on but not stated directly in my earlier response, maybe the members of the Slytherin gang who didn't Death Eaters were girls, notably Narcissa? Not to sound sexist, but it doesn't seem that any women other than Bellatrix became Death Eaters. Carol From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 07:03:14 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:03:14 -0000 Subject: - The Gang of Slytherins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85409 > Carol: > P.S. I keep catching references to a "mole" or spy in the Order, not > Snape but someone spying for the *other* side. It can't be Percy, who > has distanced himself from his family and would be a very junior > member of the Order if they let him in. Who are the suspects? > Mundungus Fletcher? Who else might it be? Erin: I'm answering this so Pippin won't have to . Ever So Evil Lupin, of course! See post 39362 for that one. Or possibly Ever So Evil McGonagall. See post 39470. I don't believe in either, but do keep your eyes peeled for my upcoming ESE!Bill Weasley post, lol. Erin From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 07:30:58 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:30:58 -0000 Subject: Mister Figg....? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85410 > "sylvia wrote: > > Mr. Figg, if he ever existed, is > > either dead or has legged it long ago. Perhaps he couldn't stand > all > > those cats. > Erin wrote: > Or perhaps he was killed by Voldemort, which is why Mrs. Figg is > participating in the OotP. I can't think of too many other reasons > for a Squib to care what happens in the Magical world. That would > explain why she dresses and acts so battily also-- it's grief. Since > her husband died, she's never really been able to bring herself to > care about how she appears to everyone else. That's an interesting idea, Erin. There could be a parallel with Neville's gran, though she's a witch, not a squib like Mrs. Figg--grief making them eccentric, etc. Even though I think Mr. Figg was a Muggle (they lived in Little Whinging and the MoM has never heard of Mrs. Figg), it's possible that Voldemort or the Death Eaters killed him. And I suspect there's a connection to Dementors, too, based on Mrs. Figg's knowledge of them in OoP. Also, the cats may not just be an annoyance. One of them (Mr. Tibbles IIRC) seems to have been keeping an eye on Harry in the opening chapter of OoP, so I think he's a magical creature with uncanny powers of observation, like Mrs. Norris only "good." BTW, has anyone else noticed an odd parallel here? Male squib (Filch), female cat (Mrs. Norris); Female squib (Mrs. Figg), male cat (Mr. Tibbles). I wonder what kind of encounter we'd have if those two ever met? I can just see Filch giving up on medieval torture devices and trying to learn elementary magic with Mrs. Figg while their cats--never mind. Seriously, though, two squibs with cats that act as spies? Can it be a coincidence? Ahem. This started out as a serious post but got a bit out of hand. I think maybe it's time to go to bed. Carol From dfran at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 19 07:54:59 2003 From: dfran at sbcglobal.net (deedeee88) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:54:59 -0000 Subject: Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85411 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sanityescapesme1979" wrote: > I do believe Neville will play an important role in the future books. > He will either be the one to murder Bellatrix, save someone, or find > a cure for his parents. I believe JKR should let Neville be the one > to torture and kill Bellatrix since she was the one who made his > parents insane. I cried when I read the part when he was in the > hospital visting them. The reason why I believe he will save someone > or find a cure for his parents is because it's mentioned he is good at > herbology. It has to mean something; why else mention it in almost > every book? Also, my question is: what is the deal with the plant he > recieved for his birthday (fifth book pg.186 American version) > Mimbulus mimbletonia? He says it himself it does a lot of things. > Also, it's the password to get in to Gryffindor Tower. > > SanityEscapesMe1979 This is what OOP wanted to show us about it all... 1. The "new" plant Neville got would have healing properities which would assist Neville's parents' healing process. 2. Will Neville find a plant that will make "those who eat said plant" be immune to many curses. 3. did Harry eat this plant already? 4. If so, is this is why Snape is so angry with Neville.(because Neville cannot remember...OOP taught us one thing...if Neville knows anything, it will never come out of the Tutalege of Snape). 5. JKR reminds us of the importance of plants when devil's snare is delivered to a patient really close to Neville's parent. (a very real threat, so much so that after it happened Neville grows by leaps and bounds in the DA class, stands up to peers, AND more importantly brings up his encounter with the HP crew at the hospital.) Do not ever forget that the story is told from HP's P.O.V.! 6. What are the properties of stinksap? (we know of at least one or more that ingested it in the train car) 7. Did the stink sap give or take anything from those around them. 8. Did the stink sap bond them all in some way? 9. This will never become clear until we hear from Neville on a herbology subject. (Neville can take care of plants...but will...or, rather, CAN he remember what all the plants do?!?!?) Neville didn't become "LIPPY" (i.e. saying more than a paragraph) since book one; until this book. Neville does have one thing in going for him... MOM doesn't seem to legislate as much for "vegetable" or even potion (for you Snape fans) "magic" as much for 'sentient' beings. DeeDee From florentinemaier at hotmail.com Wed Nov 19 08:56:19 2003 From: florentinemaier at hotmail.com (Florentine Maier) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 08:56:19 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85412 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > "Florentine Maier" wrote: > I presume that it's not just a rumor but that the post is actually > jinxed. I think the jinx could go something like that: "Everybody who > takes the job of DADA-teacher will come to grief because of his/her > greatest weakness within a year." > > Cases in point: [snip] > Moody: Paranoia [snip] > > Carol: > Interesting theory. Only one nitpick: The real Moody didn't lose the > post because of paranoia. His paranoia was fully justified. He didn't > teach because he was in a trunk under an Imperius curse, and strictly > speaking, he didn't lose the post (though he didn't take it the > following year, either). Imposter!Moody, OTOH, never intended to take > the post for more than a year and said so at the welcoming feast in > OoP, but he didn't expect to end his term as teacher quite the way he > did. His greatest weakness would not be paranoia but--hm--Deception? > Malice? Vengeance? Just being a murderous, conniving Death Eater? At > any rate, he was altogether evil and even though he wasn't able to > testify that Voldemort had returned, no one except possibly Voldemort > is sorry that he's gone. Anyway, Wrong Moody, wrong weakness, but no > effect on your theory over all. [snip] Florentine: Good point... So the jinx brought *fake* Moody to fall because of his worst character trait: being evil. When I said that Moody came to grief because of being paranoid, I was thinking of _real_ Moody. Everybody believed that paranoid old Moody was just imagining the attack on him, shortly before the school year started. So nobody thought of the possibility that he might actually have been kidnapped and put into a trunk. And nobody came to save him. I think the jinx got both of them. Greetings, Florentine From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 10:07:08 2003 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 10:07:08 -0000 Subject: Simultaneous Worldwide Publication? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85413 "hickengruendler" wrote: > Than you were really lucky. Here in Germany, it was printed in > the "Bild", a "newspaper", which you can compare to the Sun. They > got a few facts wrong (probably they wanted to post the spoilers as > soon as possible). For example they said, that Voldemort would die, > too, in a duel with Voldemort, Er... Voldemort would die in a duel with Voldemort ? I'm confused ;-) > which was obviously not quite true. > Nonetheless, I knew a few people who read it and were spoiled after > this, without wanting it. And they were angry. Ah well, I guess here in France we're lucky because the media haven't really started to grasp the amplitude of the HP phenomenon, so they don't give it much coverage. It could also be that they're very France-centered, and they don't care much about what rocks the English-speaking world, unless it has consequences for us in France. And finally, I'd say that even if a newspaper did publish something about a new HP book, it wouldn't be on the front-page. Come ON, this is not *serious* news (no pun intended) ! Politics, economics, judiciary, all those are serious, but a kids' book ? No way. I don't know if Olivier and Iris (and others) would agree with me, but that's the feeling I get about the media and HP in France : they just don't care. Del From mrsroper68 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 19 00:19:24 2003 From: mrsroper68 at hotmail.com (Tilly) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 00:19:24 -0000 Subject: Percy vs Sirus Question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85414 Hi, My question is this is there any connection in Percy, who has obviously gone bad in OoP being from a good family, and Sirus who is good being from a bad family? Is this JKR's way of irony or is there something underlying in these two comparisons, maybe that Love is not the root of all but friends and colleagues? Nikki aka wannabe Minerva McGonagall From sylviablundell at aol.com Wed Nov 19 10:56:48 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 10:56:48 -0000 Subject: Mister Figg...? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85415 Apologies, Carol, for snipping your post too heavily. I only wanted to answer the question of what name Mrs (?) Figg gives in court. Otherwise we are in perfect accord! Sylvia (who feels that, given the way the MoM seems to function, it might be an advantage not to be known to them!) From templerichmond at earthlink.net Wed Nov 19 00:41:05 2003 From: templerichmond at earthlink.net (canismajorette) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 00:41:05 -0000 Subject: Encryption Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85416 There is a long established English literary tradition of code communication used by the likes of Sir Francis Bacon and John Dee, Renaissance Hermeticists. Due to the prejudices of their times, they revealed their messages in various intriguing forms of encryption. I believe Rowling follows this admirable tradition in various ways. For example, the Hogwarts gate. It has two winged boars atop. The Boar was used by Sir Francis Bacon as his secret identifying symbol, as is discussed extensively by Peter Dawkins in his book entitled "Arcadia." Why would Rowling be referring covertly to Francis Bacon? THIS is a big, big topic, about which more could be said later. A second example. Note the use of anagrams throughout. The anagram is a simple but classic example of encryption technique. That Rowling would use such an invention suggests two things on the face of it: one, she is well aware of this tradition, and two, there are levels upon levels of meaning here, and I would venture to say that the good majority of it far transcends anything that might be considered children's literature. I've written a study that includes this topic as one of three sections. It is 22 pages with 42 footnotes in scholarly style, and I would be glad to send it to anyone who wants it by way of attachment from personal e mail. I would be glad to post it here for all to see without anyone having to reveal personal e mail, if there is a way. Elves, have you suggestions? The paper deals extensively with Rowling. The title is "Elements of New Age Spirituality in the Harry Potter Novels of J.K. Rowling." It was delivered just this past October 25 at a conference of university professors in religious studies and others. It is not stuffy, though, and is filled with puns only fandom can fathom. Canis Majorette. Admin note: If you wish to respond to any of the non-canonical discussion elements in this post, please off-list the author. From madoushi_clef_00 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 04:18:39 2003 From: madoushi_clef_00 at yahoo.com (Master Clef) Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 20:18:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031119041839.60506.qmail@web41306.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85417 "tigerpatronus" wrote:... <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says: <> Clef: THANK YOU, Gods, someone else that doesn't think Dumbledore is that Shining Beacon of Hope. He does have that twinkle at then end of book 4, but more importantly I can't trust a man who had 11 years and more magic at his disposal than the WW's gov't who didn't do anything to ensuring Riddle's demise. No, no, instead he waited for a baby to grow to age 11 and demanded he become a murderer (Quirrell--not that I won't have killed him), be responsible for the well-being of everyone at Hogwarts (book 2 & 3), killing Riddle (5 & 6), and saving the world in general--but don't forget to hand in that potion's essay you know how Professor Snape gets. And even if Dumbledore is that completely on the side of Goodness and Righteousness, maybe he's too far on that side. He's 'noble' (McGonagall; PS pg 14), maybe he's too noble. Maybe he has such regard for life, that he can't kill anyone, even if he should. I don't remember him killing any of the DE or Riddle (or Harry) in book 5, just fighting. I have a simple theory that maybe DD needed Harry, because Harry shares the same darkness as Riddle that allows him to kill without remorse. Harry never even bothers to think about that he actually killed Quirrell, albeit indirectly. I'll stop on that thought, I'm sure that Harry/Quirrell thing has been done to ... death (no pun intended) already, but I say, Dumbldore is not the Shining Beacon of Hope everyone thinks he is. I think he's a coward, and a liability, and half the time, he's using Harry as much as Riddle uses Harry. Done, I swear. ~Clef From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 04:29:50 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 04:29:50 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85418 Steve wrote: > I suspect that once Harry is gone from the > school, the 'magnet'that has been drawing > bad luck to the job will be gone too. Along the lines of Harry being the jinx on the DADA teachers, we don't know how long Quirrell taught DADA, before PS/SS, however I suspect it was for at least couple of school years, because Hagrid said Quirrell was fine "while he was teaching out of books", then he left to get some experience defending DADA. So Quirrell must have taught for a year at least, left to get some experience, maybe during the summer, then returned to teach another year. I say he returned to teach another year, because Hagrid comments on Quirrell's change sound like they are about the past year (or years). I think Quirrell was there at Hogwarts for at least two years before Harry. This means of course that Quirrell actually had the job for more than a year, so the jinx hadn't started yet. Jen Reese wrote: > (And I'm still not convinved Quirrell's conversion > was completely his doing--LV seems to be very > *convincing* when needed....). Seeing as Voldemort was in need of a host, I imagine that he was very "convincing". Quirrell could have agreed because he wanted what Voldemort was offering or he could have really been an unfortunate pawn in all of this. Earlier in PS/SS, he protests what he has to do, but then at the end, he brags about finding Voldemort and having him as an ally/master. The obvious answer is that Voldemort took him over more and more, so that by the end he was completely in step with Voldemort which would coincide with the unfortunate pawn theory. Hogwarts may have had a decent good DADA teacher before Voldemort came along. Of course, that would make Voldemort the jinx not Harry. Like Harry said "trouble finds him", but ultimately where can all Harry's and the DADA teachers trouble be traced back... Voldemort. Yolanda From erbef at hotmail.com Wed Nov 19 07:40:09 2003 From: erbef at hotmail.com (chuckida2000) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:40:09 -0000 Subject: No More Questions (was Reflections On That Mirror) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85419 Kneasy wrote: > Now I see three possibilities: > > 1. The Evans' link back to the Riddles, > 2. The Potters link back to Marvelo Whatever Voldy's mother was > called, possibly with a name change when Voldy got nasty the first > time around and the family wanted to cut all connections to such a > blot on the family escutcheon, > 3. Or *both* links are applicable. Actually, I was thinking about this earlier and have a different possibility... Dumbledore is estimated to be 150 years old. His brother is probably close to or equal to the same age (I don't think we've been told that they are twins, but I could be wrong.) When Harry first looks into the Mirror of Erised, he sees 10 people with green eyes. Ancestors? We aren't sure since nothing says that the Mirror shows true images. We do know from J.K. Rowling that the green eyes and his mother's background are going to be important. We also have Dumbledore in SS stating that the first question Harry asks after meeting Quirrel/Voldemort is the one question Dumbledore can't answer yet. We also know that Albus Dumbledore had red hair 50 years ago from the memories of Tom Riddle's Diary. Which could mean his brother had red hair too...So, another possibility is that Albus or his brother is Harry's Great or Great-great grandfather. I'd lean more towards Albus' brother since at the end of OOP Albus makes a point of saying that his mistake was not recognizing that he was beginning to care too much. If Harry was his own great/great- great grandson. I'm guessing that he wouldn't have been able to try his plan. Chuckida From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 11:13:15 2003 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:13:15 -0000 Subject: Too damaged to live (was Re: I love tragic endings) In-Reply-To: <000001c3ae13$f850c380$6401a8c0@helenw1> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85420 "Helen R. Granberry" wrote: > I think this notion of `too damaged to live' is... well, horrible. Horrible maybe, but quite real. > Not because these are kids books, I think these are everyone books. > I just think that this is horrible from a philosophical > perspective. Where there is life, there is hope (unless you are > irredeemably evil, but that isn't Harry). "Where there is life, there is hope" ? Nope, not true. I lived for 15 years in complete hopelessness. I would have committed suicide a long, long time ago if I hadn't been convinced that the after-life would be even worse. > Having a tragic, messed up past may make things more > difficult, but as JKR has gone to great pains to point out ? it is > our choices that make us who we are. ARGH ! This one is *really* starting to grate on my nerves ! So let's see : the fact that I didn't have a father shouldn't influence who I am ? The fact that I was sexually abused as a kid shouldn't influence who I am ? The religion I was taught as a kid shouldn't influence who I am ? I agree that *someday* we all have to come to grips with our problems, and decide what to do with them. But I'm sick of hearing that we shouldn't let them bother us in the first place ! And I personally would NOT expect a teenager NOT to be partially defined by things that are not at all HIS choices. I also agree that kids MUST be taught that they are responsible for their choices, that they can't just avoid taking responsibility for their actions by saying "that's the way I am, I can't help it". But the truth is : sometimes, it IS the way they are, and FOR NOW they REALLY can't help it. They have to learn how to modify their behaviour and this is usually a long and painful process. So let's face it : it is NOT ONLY our choices who make us who we are. So why did DD say that to Harry ? Seems obvious to me : he didn't want him to wallow in self-pity, he didn't want him to expect everything from others just because he's a tragic hero. He wanted to make him equal to other kids, by convincing him that his past had no influence on his future. But it is painfully obvious to me that DD knew very well he was partially lying when he said that : he *knew* Harry's future *was* already partially defined by his past. For example, no matter what he did now, he was and would always be the Prophecy Boy. That was NOT a matter of choice for Harry. He can now decide whether he wants to fulfill that role or not, but he can't decide whether he is the Prophecy Boy or not. Big difference. > If Harry survives this thing, he will be damaged, no question. He > will bear scars that cut deep. However, if it is not possible for > Harry to ever find happiness in his life, then Voldemort has won > because Harry has LET HIM WIN. He has let him control his life > beyond death. Even if I lost everything in my life I cared > about, I would want to live. I would be damaged, but I would be > determined not to let it ruin my life. You only get one chance. It would all depend on what kind of scar you would have collected. I've suffered from depression for more than 15 years. It was NOT a choice of mine. But it sure killed all hope and will to live. I'm going to be 30 in a few days, and I feel like I am finally starting to live again. I'm starting to have hope, to make plans, to see the point of living. And I'm finally able to truly make decisions based on what I want from life, not just on pure survival instincts or outside pressure. Yes, you only get one chance, but if life manages to convince you that you've let that one chance pass by, then you can't see the point of living any longer. > Harry's life has been very hard and mostly loveless. He deserves > some happiness. I don't get this matter of "deserving happiness". Who said so ? How does that work ? If you go through enough torment, that means you deserve to be happy ? Then what does it mean for those who have a pleasant life ? And there are people who live hellish lives all their lives. So ? > I also think (and this is a moral judgment of Harry's character) > that he has the will and courage to not let Voldemort defeat him > after he is gone. Even if he loses even more people he cares about > (and I am wagering that Dumbledore, Hagrid and either Ron or > Hermione are goners for sure), he still has the ability because of > his moral character to move on and live a happy life. Unless he gets depressed. I know. I was strong until I was about 12 or 13. I mean really strong. I wouldn't let anything negative affect me. I refused to give in to my bad circumstances. I was like you : I believed I could mold my life, no matter what. And then I broke. > As for Pip and Estella, I think that was a completely different > kind of story. Great Expectations seemed to have an entirely > different message than Harry Potter. These were not heroic > characters. They were messed up, but they never really made an > effort to rise beyond what fate handed them. Harry has. The fact > that he was able to come out of the horrible, abusive, neglectful > Dursley household as well grounded as he did says a lot about > Harry. He does not let random twists of fate determine the > person he is. He is not a victim. Horrible things happen to him, > but he fights it. He doesn't give up or use it as an excuse. As I said above, I was just like Harry until I got about 12-13. But nobody came to whisk me away from my life. Granted, Harry's life in Hogwarts is *not* a dream life. But it is different from the one at the Dursleys, so that he can understand that his future life can be different from his previous life. This move gives him *perspective*. Nobody did that for me. I couldn't figure out a way to change my life. I couldn't put my past traumas into perspective. Now that I am older and that I grew up into a different person than I was at age 12, I can do that. But I couldn't at the time. And by the way, nobody chooses to be a victim. And even victims fight. It would sometimes take all my strength just to live through one more day, so that to other people it looked like I wasn't fighting at all. Sure I wasn't doing things, I wasn't undertaking new projects, I wasn't seeing people. Because I couldn't, I had no strength left for that. And I couldn't see the point. > In OotP, Dumbledore talks about this pain that is worse than death. > I don't think that pain is losing what you love; I think what is > worse than death is never knowing love at all -- or perhaps getting > a glimpse, and knowing it is too late for you, knowing it is > something you can never have because you made the wrong choices. > Voldemort has chosen mere existence over truly living. He has > forsaken all values in pursuit of this non-value ? living a life > that is really not a life at all. Voldemort can never know > happiness because he holds no values other than merely continuing > to exist. He can never know love. This is worse than death ? it is > a living death. It's funny, because the way you describe LV's life is exactly what the life of a depressed person feels like : existence, not life. But LV isn't depressed, for sure :-) Though I guess one could argue that he does suffer from some deep psychological issues. As for not knowing love, I don't know. I have known love, and it often put even more stress on me, because when people love you, you have some kind of responsibility towards them. For me, the worst thing there is, is the loss of *hope*. When you see no reason to live anymore, then life truly becomes a pain worse than death. > Now, I will admit I want Harry to live. I am all for JKR taking > risks and I don't think she should do X or not do Y for the sake of > the children. I do, however, admit to finding certain conclusions > morally or philosophically disagreeable. It isn't so much about > wanting a happy ending with butterflies and sunshine, but what is > the moral and philosophical conclusion of the series. Has JKR set > up a world where love and happiness are impossible and life is > futile? I don't think she has. Okay, I'm with you on that one. I don't think her intent is to make Harry horribly depressed and suicidal, and to teach kids about depression. What would be the point of it ? > If she kills Harry, I'll be upset. I'll probably never read the > books again knowing how it all ends. However, depending on how she > goes about it, I think this can be a perfectly acceptable `good' > ending. I agree : it all depends on *how* she does it. > I think killing Harry because life's not worth living anyway is > probably the WORST possible conclusion. The most depressing for sure ;-) Del From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Wed Nov 19 09:39:01 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: 19 Nov 2003 09:39:01 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1069234745.1822.10.camel@Bujold_RH> No: HPFGUIDX 85421 On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 03:32, Jen Reese wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: >> I suspect that once Harry is gone from the school, the 'magnet' that >> has been drawing bad luck to the job will be gone too. However, I must >> amend that by pointing out that with the exception of Lupin, all the >> DADA teachers were either incompetent or their integrity was seriously >> compromised. Either way, they were corrupted in ways that almost >> guaranteed their doom. >> >Jen R: You know, I think even Lupin was undone in the end by his own >weakness--cowardice, as he himself says in POA . He didn't want to >risk Dumbledore's trust by telling him about the illegal animagi and >the secret tunnels; those omissions led to the finale in the >Shrieking Shack and ultimately, Lupin's fate. I don't see it as >corruption so much as a character flaw, though. (And I'm still not >convinved Quirrell's conversion was completely his doing--LV seems >to be very *convincing* when needed....). But you get no argument >from me on Crouch!Moody, Lockhart and Umbridge being deeply corrupt >to begin with. Angel: The Dark Arts is in effect bowing to the darkest desires of the human soul, and taking the shortest cut to achieve those end, whether it be lawful or no. In effect we had two DADA teachers in book V, both undone by their weaknesses - Harry by his love of playing the hero, and Umbridge by her officiousness. The nature of the job is that unless we acknowledge our weaknesses and play to our strengths then we will fail. Lupin's weakness isn't so much cowardice as a generalised insecurity or a feeling that he doesn't deserve to have friends. The other interesting thing is that we now know how easy it is to be seduced by evil - Harry succumbing to LV in V. Until book V I would have said that Ron was in danger of being seduced to the Dark because he's always been in the shadows. Now JKR has let him achieve on his own merits... or has she. Are the achievements of Book V really some evil power in Ron Angel of the North, Newbie brief intro: I'm 24, fanfic writer, Livejournallist, English and living in London. Just graduated and looking for work. AotN From elfundeb at comcast.net Wed Nov 19 11:22:26 2003 From: elfundeb at comcast.net (elfundeb) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 06:22:26 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) References: Message-ID: <007601c3ae8f$697d94e0$9ddc5644@arlngt01.va.comcast.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85422 Joj wrote: I am very suspicious of his Grandmother. [snip] Also, there's been speculation that someone may be drugging Neville's parents in St. Mungos. Granny could visit as often as she wants , and not arouse any suspicion. I could be crazy, but I think we might have Evil!Gran! Debbie: I can't claim to have invented Evil!Gran, but I was definitely an early proponent of her having perpetrated heinous crimes, and perhaps the first to have claimed that she uses her visits to St. Mungo's to make sure they never recover (#36889). I had also argued that they did not lose their sanity from Cruciatus (though Bellatrix confirms in OOP that she did use that curse on them) but had lost their minds in the same manner as Bertha Jorkins when the MoM attempted to break through the charm in order to obtain evidence to convict the Pensieve Four (#38792, but more eloquently summarized in Elkins' Memory Charm symposium (#38848)). There's definitely something odd about Gran's actions. Carol wrote: Just as readers were set up to suspect Snape in SS/PS, we're being set up to suspect Neville's gran--only the clues and the mysteries are more sophisticated now. I think that formidable as she is, Gran is on the good side and woe to any Death Eaters if they go near her, especially if they happened to be named Lestrange. Debbie: Reluctantly, I now have to agree with Carol. I more or less thought Neville himself laid to rest the Evil!Gran speculation in OOP ch. 11 when he said "[Gran] says it's the Daily Prophet that's going downhill, not Dumbledore. She's cancelled our subscription. We believe Harry." But I think Gran's treatment of Neville is shabby nevertheless, if not emotionally abusive, the way she insists on putting him down in public. I think Gran has a claim to a form of evilness even if she is not Evil!Gran. Sanityescapesme1979 asked: Also, my question is: what is the deal with the plant he recieved for his birthday (fifth book pg.186 American version) Mimbulus mimbletonia? Debbie: This has been discussed before. Its name is similar to a real plant, mimulus mimbletonia, which is said to be a remedy which draws out the quiet courage of shy, timid individuals. Sanityescapesme2000 continued: Also, it's the password to get in to Gryffindor Tower.>> Debbie: It's the password to Gryffindor Tower because whoever set the password (the prefects, perhaps?) chose something Neville, whose inability to remember passwords is legendary, would be unable to forget. In prior books Neville's inability to remember passwords was used to emphasize his forgetfulness. In OOP, the presence of the mimbulus mimbletonia allows his forgetfulness to be downplayed in two ways: Neville's courage shows through more clearly (though we know it was always there) and he doesn't forget the password (which, curiously, is never changed). I think this was deliberate. I don't think Neville is less forgetful than he was before, but it's being downplayed. For example, when Snape rejected Harry's potion in ch. 12, Harry thought Neville's potion was as bad as his own, and Harry forgot an ingredient, so I'll bet Neville did, too. But the mimbulus mimbletonia gives Neville the courage he needs to forge ahead in spite of his forgetfulness. What do I think this all means? I think we shouldn't abandon all that Memory Charm speculation just yet. I think that something important is buried in Neville's head, just as I believe his parents have important backstory information that is being suppressed. As Neville grows increasingly confident in his magical abilities, he'll be increasingly able to throw it off. He's a *much* better wizard than Lockhart, and even he's regaining some memory. Joj wrote: I think she's spent her time making Neville clumsy and forgetful and think she almost got away with passing off as a squib, until his uncle ruined it by dropping him out the window. Debbie: Under the old Benevolent Memory Charm theories, Gran supposedly Memory Charmed Neville in order to protect him from horrible memories of the attack on his parents. I think the WW is too harsh for that to be a reasonable scenario, but the idea that Gran is affecting Neville's memory and using psychological means to keep Neville from realizing his potential, or from accessing information, is more appealing. The question, however, is just what she's protecting. Is it Frank's memory? Is there a secret about Frank that would stain his martyrdom? Or did she really think the DEs would return someday to pry out Neville's memories of what he witnessed when the Pensieve Four came to visit? I don't know, but there's lots of time to speculate before Book 6 is published. ;-) Debbie who has believed in Memory Charmed Neville since first reading the books over two years ago [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From patnkatng at cox.net Wed Nov 19 12:57:26 2003 From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 12:57:26 -0000 Subject: - Rabastan (was: The Gang of Slytherins) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85423 --- In Post #85408, Carol wrote: *snip* > Also, doesn't Sirius indicate somewhere that Bellatrix is about three > years older than he is? That would make her three years older than > Snape as well, and her husband is probably the same age or a little > older. (I'm still wondering about his brother Rabastan, mentioned in > another post. Anyone for an analysis of that name and its possible > significance?) Katrina responds: While I could find nothing on "Rabastan," a quick search through the astronomy sites for "Rastaban" turned up some very interesting information. According to http://www.winshop.com.au/annew/Alwaid.html Rastaban is another name for the star Beta Draconis. It also says, "The Arabic name for Rastaban or Alwaid is Ra's ath-Thu'ban (1), 'Head of the snake'. Raso tabbani was a variation. [Hebrew name Rastaban, means the Head of the Subtle (serpent). In the Arabic it is still called Al Waid, which means, 'who is to be destroyed.'" Then it lists traditions and beliefs associated with the star as follows: Influence of the constellation: "According to Ptolemy the bright stars are like Saturn and Mars. Draco gives an artistic and emotional but somber nature, a penetrating and analytical mind, much travel and many friends, but danger of robbery and accidental poisoning. It gives craft, ingenuity, and valor. The Ancients said that when a comet was here, poison was scattered over the world. By the Kabalists it is associated with the Hebrew letter Mem and the 13th Tarot Trump, Death". (Robson). General influence of the star: It gives loss of property, violence, criminal inclinations and accidents. (Robson). With Moon: Blindness, wounds, quarrels, bruises, stabs, blows (operations can be substituted nowadays) and kicks from horses. (Robson). Interestingly, it twice associates poison with the constellation Draco. Things that make you go, "Hmmmm. . . " From patnkatng at cox.net Wed Nov 19 12:59:41 2003 From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 12:59:41 -0000 Subject: - Rabastan (was: The Gang of Slytherins) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85424 Sorry, Carol posed her question in post #85407. It's upthread somewhere, anyway. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katrina" wrote: > --- In Post #85408, > > Carol wrote: > > *snip* From patnkatng at cox.net Wed Nov 19 13:23:53 2003 From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 13:23:53 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: <20031119041839.60506.qmail@web41306.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85425 --- In Post #85417, Master Clef wrote: I have a simple theory that maybe DD needed Harry, because Harry shares the same darkness as Riddle that allows him to kill without remorse. Harry never even bothers to think about that he actually killed Quirrell, albeit indirectly. Katrina responds: Is this, perhaps, movie contamination? I found no reference in SS/PS that Quirrel was killed. When Harry passed out, he was holding Quirrel by the arm and Voldemort was screaming, "KILL HIM, KILL HIM!" Dumbledore (I know, I know. . .) does say that *Harry* nearly died. From kewiromeo at aol.com Wed Nov 19 13:25:59 2003 From: kewiromeo at aol.com (kewiromeo at aol.com) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 08:25:59 EST Subject: Were we right? New characters? Message-ID: <97.40d9a8f6.2cecc967@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85426 I mean seriously guys, look at all the predictions we made after book 4. How many things were we actualy right about? I made some of the most amazing and logical predictions but she completely steered me off course. Everything came out of nowhere. Do you think that she is going to introduce even more characters? Those just really ruined our predictions. I think that they have enough characters and the story has been so established that she can barely possibly introduce people we don't know. I don't mean bringing back characters with trivial positions, I mean bringing us another Tonks or Umbridge. What do you guys/gals think? Tzvi of Brooklyn [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 13:36:03 2003 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 13:36:03 -0000 Subject: Neville's Gran In-Reply-To: <001901c3ae17$218e98a0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85427 > starmom513 wrote: > > I like your theory about Gran trying to pass Neville > off as a squib. Is it possible she knows something > about the prophecy and Neville's potential role in it? > Could she be trying to protect him from LV by showing > him NOT to be a danger? > > > Joj: > > I also think it's important that Neville thought his Gran would > kill him when she found out about the broken wand. Was she worried > about the cost of another wand or is it that she made him use > that "weak" wand, under the guise that it was his fathers? At first, I was wondering how a wand could be "weak", as you said. I mean, it can't just be because it's not Neville's own wand. As people keep saying, Ron's new wand didn't improve his results dramatically. (Aside question though, as I don't have my books here : does it say whether Ron's new wand was bought at Ollivander's, or could it have been bought in a second-hand shop ? In that case, it wouldn't be any better for Ron than having Charlie's wand - or was it Bill's ?) BUT... But what if Dear Gran had the wand CURSED before she gave it to Neville ?! After all, it's true that she seemed quite insistent in believing that Neville was a squib. So maybe, after Uncle Algie (?) managed to prove that Neville was a true wizard, and Neville got his letter from Hogwarts, Dear Gran decided she would do her best to keep Neville as far away from magic as possible. And what best way to achieve that but convince him personally (not just other people, but Neville himself !) that he's no good as a wizard ? What do you say ? I know I'm plain crazy :-), but what about that theory ? Del From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Nov 19 14:36:35 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 14:36:35 -0000 Subject: Were we right? New characters? In-Reply-To: <97.40d9a8f6.2cecc967@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85428 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, kewiromeo at a... wrote: > > Do you think that she is going to introduce even more characters? Those just > really ruined our predictions. I think that they have enough characters and > the story has been so established that she can barely possibly introduce people > we don't know. I don't mean bringing back characters with trivial positions, I > mean bringing us another Tonks or Umbridge. > > What do you guys/gals think? > > Tzvi of Brooklyn > > I don't mind the new characters. In fact, I think it is logical. The more Harry learns about the wizarding world, the more characters he gets to learn. I also would argue that both, Tonks and Umbridge, have a point. Tonks is a member of the order. It would be a bit unrealistic if the Order only consists of people Harry already knew. Okay, Tonks got a bit more "pagetime" than other Order members. That really isn't that bad. I saw her as a represent of all the new Order members. Umbridge united most of the school. This was a direct link to the Sorting hat's new song. She also was responsible for Dumbledore, McGonagall and Hagrid leaving school. If they were there, the whole climax wouldn't have happened, because Harry, although daft enough not to think about Snape, would have gone to Dumbledore, Hagrid or McGonagall. Hickengruendler From rredordead at aol.com Wed Nov 19 14:42:42 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 14:42:42 -0000 Subject: Percy vs Sirus Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85429 Nikki wrote: > My question is this is there any connection in Percy, who has obviously > gone bad in OoP being from a good family, and Sirus who is good being > from a bad family? Is this JKR's way of irony or is there something > underlying in these two comparisons, maybe that Love is not the root > of all but friends and colleagues? I think more than just irony although that is part of it. It's also part of JKR way of reminding us adults and teaching children that not everything we see is black or white. Good or Bad. Gryiffindor or Slytherin. Harry or Draco. Etc. There is so much gray that life can be very difficult and challenging and all our decisions have consequences that affect others. What's important is to believe in yourself, as Percy does, but even than you must always respect those who love and care for you. I'm sure Sirius' parents loved him, in their own way, and like to believe it must have been just as difficult for Sirius to turn his back on his family as it was for Percy. Despite the fact that the Black family is stereotypically 'evil' and the Weasleys are stereotypically 'good.' I love that Molly and Arthur are acting in a similar way to Mrs. (and probably Mr.) Black. Turning their backs on their son and refusing to talk to him. I also was thinking that we witnessed the Mrs. Black and Sirius relationship after 20 years of ill feeling and the embarrassment and slur of her having a son in prison of 15 years. We are witnessing the Percy and parents relationship at the beginning of their split. Whose to say Mr. and Mrs. Weasley wont get as bitter as Mrs. Black after 20 years of mutual hate. I don't know if this answers your question, but these are a few thoughts I had while reading your post. J Mandy From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Wed Nov 19 14:51:01 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 09:51:01 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville's Gran References: Message-ID: <000f01c3aeac$8cc7d420$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85430 Del wrote: BUT... But what if Dear Gran had the wand CURSED before she gave it to Neville ?! After all, it's true that she seemed quite insistent in believing that Neville was a squib. So maybe, after Uncle Algie (?) managed to prove that Neville was a true wizard, and Neville got his letter from Hogwarts, Dear Gran decided she would do her best to keep Neville as far away from magic as possible. And what best way to achieve that but convince him personally (not just other people, but Neville himself !) that he's no good as a wizard ? Joj: I think that sounds about right. Neville's wand breaking or being broken played no role in the book. (Unlike Ron's in CoS) Then why do it? It doesn't seem like Neville got any confidence or comfort from using his Dad's wand. He wasn't upset for himself, only in his Gran's reaction to it breaking. Being his hero/invalid Dad's wand is a great cover for making him use a used wand. I'm sure Neville would never dare complain about it, or ask for a new one. I hope Neville gets to go to Ollivander's and let a wand choose him! Joj "It isn't the jeans that make your butt look fat." [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From rredordead at aol.com Wed Nov 19 14:53:01 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 14:53:01 -0000 Subject: Were we right? New characters? In-Reply-To: <97.40d9a8f6.2cecc967@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85431 Tzvi wrote: > Do you think that she is going to introduce even more characters? I think that they have enough characters and > the story has been so established that she can barely possibly introduce people > we don't know. Now me: I think that just as in real life we continually meet new people so will Harry Potter as he learns more about the WW and his destiny. Character will come and go. Some of the ones we've met will fade away or die and new one's will emerge. Of course it will help to make leaving the series after Book 7 very difficult because there will most certainly be characters who will never have resolution. But again that's life. People leave your life and you never find out what happens to them. Bring on more characters, I say! If they are half as interesting as the ones we meet in Book 5 we are in for a really treat. Mandy From prlrocks at aol.com Wed Nov 19 11:47:22 2003 From: prlrocks at aol.com (prlrocks) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:47:22 -0000 Subject: How did Giants come in contact with the Muggles? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85432 Looking at the Lexicon the following passage caught my attention: "The Giants allied themselves with Voldemort in the 1970s and were responsible for many of the worst incidents of killing and torturing, especially of Muggles." How is it that the Giants came in contact with the Muggles? One would think that Giants going into Muggle community would be impossible to cover up, even with a whole army of wizards screaming Obliviate so I assume that isn't what happened. Also I doubt that the Death Eaters would waste their time bringing Muggles to the Giants when they could just kill them themselves. And finally, would the Giants just attacking Muggles who happened to come into their area, be that much concern to most wizards? Just wondering. prlrocks From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Wed Nov 19 13:37:38 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:37:38 -0600 Subject: Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000201c3aea2$505468f0$8a92aec7@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 85433 > DeeDee > >2.? Will Neville find a plant that will make "those who eat said >plant" be immune to many curses. > >3.? did Harry eat this plant already? > Iggy here: I just realized... Wasn't everyone that was covered in the stinksap on the train in the MoM "Rescue Team?" Also, Hermione and Ron were on the team, but not covered in the sap... Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't they the two that suffered the worst magical injuries and required the most healing time? Could this have to do, in some way, with the stinksap? Iggy McSnurd From chiara.fantoni at cec.eu.int Wed Nov 19 11:36:29 2003 From: chiara.fantoni at cec.eu.int (chiara.fantoni at cec.eu.int) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 12:36:29 +0100 Subject: Hermione Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85434 I don't like Hermione, that little spoiled arrogant brat "I know it all", never did, never will. If I recall correctly JKR said more than once that Hermione's character reflects her own personality; up to now I haven't read or watched a single interview, as I'm a very late fan. Is JKR that arrogant? Can someone point me to some place where I can find interviews? Sorry if I offended anyone, but I suppose I'm entitled to my opinion ;-) Chiara From belijako at online.no Wed Nov 19 15:11:49 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:11:49 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85435 Mel wrote: Mel, who thinks perhaps Snape didn't create the jinx, but might just > want to turn it to his advantage. Me: Is it just me, or are there more HP readers out there who doesn't think the DADA position is jinxed? My impression from reading the books is that it's just a rumour created by students with too much imagination... If you asked Dumbledore or Hermione about it, they would probably say it's just superstition. And I agree with them :-) Berit From foxmoth at qnet.com Wed Nov 19 15:28:22 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:28:22 -0000 Subject: FILK: That's An Auror Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85436 That's An Auror A Filk by Pippin To the tune of "That's Amore" Hear the original at http://wilstar.com/midi/thatsamore.htm Dedicated to Hagridd (who had the idea) and Constance Vigilance When Mad Moody walks by with his swivelling eye That's an Auror When he clumps down the street with his mismatching feet That's an Auror Curses ring, making hexes sting, jinxes will take wing And he'll growl Gotcha, Bella! Legs will kick with a magic trick when he wields his stick with a tarantellegra When a klutz in the hall starts to trip and then fall That's an Auror She can alter her hair but she's no Fred Astaire I'm afraid When she falls on her butt and she says call me not Nymphadora Excuse me but you see, in the DMLE That's an Auror When a soft-spoken guy does a charm on the sly That's an Auror Marietta won't speak, Harry's secrets won't leak, I'm in awe When they chase after Black...but they're on the wrong track That's for sure-or He's our man, that Kingsley, in the DMLE That's an Auror (That's an Auror) That's an Auror!!! From rredordead at aol.com Wed Nov 19 15:27:43 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:27:43 -0000 Subject: The Gang of Slytherins In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85437 Carol wrote: > Maybe the members of the Slytherin gang who didn't Death > Eaters were girls, notably Narcissa? Not to sound sexist, but it > doesn't seem that any women other than Bellatrix became Death Eaters. Now me: I think we have to be careful making the assumption that Bellatrix is the only female Death Eater although it certainly looks that way. Most of the DE's named by Voldemort in the graveyard are male. (I've always questioned if the DE's who showed up or were mentioned by Voldemort are the only ones?) Maybe the DE's are mostly men and perhaps Voldemort's inner circle is male dominated. But I wouldn't be surprised if that changes in the last 2 books. It seemed to me that the early HP books were very 'boy's adventure' dominated with Harry and Ron being active and having the fun, and occasionally helped by their reactive, faithful, bookish, sidekick, the token female: Hermione. And I have to add there is nothing wrong with that. But all that dramatically changed with the injection of Girl Power in Book 5. Perhaps, as JKR's daughter is getting older, she got a crisis of conscience and had to add a few stronger female role models. Whatever the reason, we suddenly had the introduction of the retooled Hermione, Ginny and Molly, along with new characters of Luna, Umbridge and Bellatrix. (Ok she previously appeared in Book4 but we didn't know who she was until book5). I wouldn't be surprised if a few female Death Eaters showed up soon. Perhaps they will be newly initiated from some characters we've already met. Mandy From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 19 15:33:13 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:33:13 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85438 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > > Yes, I always thought that just because every dark witch or wizard > that went bad, was in Slytherin House, it doesn't necessarily mean > that all those in Slytherin House are dark witches and wizards. > But please keep in mind that it was just *Hagrid* who said, "There wasn't a witch or wizard who went bad that wasn't in Slytherin" [paraphrased]. In CoS, JKR says that MORE of the dark wizards came from Slytherin than from any of the other houses; she doesn't say they ALL came from Slytherin. I don't have my book w/ me at work [shhhh! I'm NOT checking HPfGU at work!!!], but if anyone would like chapter & verse on this statement, I'll get it later today. When I read this statement in CoS last night, I was able to take Hagrid's SS/PS comment as just a tad bit of hyperbole. Siriusly Snapey Susan From rsteph1981 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 15:34:17 2003 From: rsteph1981 at yahoo.com (Rebecca Stephens) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 07:34:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Percy Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031119153417.34981.qmail@web20001.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85439 --- erinellii wrote: > Rebecca Stephens wrote: > I'm not saying that > > what he believes is inconsistant (though it is) > but > > that his behavior is inconsistent. In GOF, he > > believed "Crouch." But he was very cool and > unruffled > > and dignified. In OOTP he is excited and > emotional > > and frankly very weird. That's the incosistant > part > > to me. > > Erin: > Cool, unruffled, and dignified? What about during > the Quidditch > World Cup? Here, I'll quote some lines: > > "Mr. Crouch?" said Percy, suddenly abandoning his > look of poker-stiff > disapproval and positively writhing with excitement. > > and > > "Mr. Crouch!" said Percy breathlessly, sunk into a > kind of half-bow > that made him look like a hunchback. "Would you like > a cup of tea?" > > and > > Percy jumped to his feet so often that he looked as > though he were > trying to sit on a hedgehog. When Cornelius Fudge, > the Minister of > Magic himself, arrived, Percy bowed so low that his > glasses fell off > and shattered. Highly embarrassed, he repaired them > with his wand and > thereafter remained in his seat, throwing jealous > looks at Harry, > whom Cornelius Fudge had greeted like an old friend. > > > Erin: > Don't get me wrong, I like Percy, but his behavior > is consistant. It > has progressed to new heights in OoP, but you can't > say the > groundwork wasn't laid. > > Erin > Yes, but he was *trying* to act professional. He's offering tea and trying to impress the boss. But he isn't scanning the news that'll send his old headmaster to jail "joyfully." He's just trying to impress the boss. It doesn't seem the same to me. Rebecca ===== http://wychlaran.tripod.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree From lhuntley at fandm.edu Wed Nov 19 15:44:28 2003 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 10:44:28 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <4250ED86-1AA7-11D8-9F04-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 85440 Chiara > I don't like Hermione, that little spoiled arrogant brat "I know it > all", > never did, never will. > If I recall correctly JKR said more than once that Hermione's character > reflects her own personality; up to now I haven't read or watched a > single > interview, as I'm a very late fan. > Is JKR that arrogant? First of all, welcome to the fandom, Chiara! As for your questions, while I strongly disagree with the assessment of Hermione as a "little spoiled arrogant brat," I can see why someone might have a negative reaction to her character. She's assertive to the point of pushiness, always says what she thinks, and *can* be insensitive in the form of putting logic before emotion (as in the case of Lavender's bunny). Many people don't like this in a woman. Heck, a lot of people don't like this in *anyone*. On the other hand, she's also brave enough to stand up for what she believes is right, no matter what the consequences (e.g. Trelawney, Umbridge, Harry's Firebolt). As a great man once said, "It takes a great deal of courage to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends." She's a *good* friend, the kind that tells you what you *need* to hear, rather than what you *want* to hear. Not only that, she *is* compassionate in many instances in the book. For instance, she is the only student who consistently doesn't look down on Neville or treat him poorly -- remember during Moody's first class when he Crucio'ed that spider and Neville freaked out? Hermione not only was the only one to notice his fear, but also the only one to care enough to tell Moody to stop. (If you hadn't noticed, I have a bit of a soft spot for Neville ^_^.) She's also mature enough to ignore the defamation of her character in GoF, clever enough to see Umbridge coming a mile away, and the only student to show Harry any manner of meaningful physical affection, which I think he's sorely missing. (Which is, IMO, an example of Hermione-as-JKR showing through. Despite what Jo puts Harry through, she really just wants to give him a hug, just like the rest of us. ^_~) Anyway, I'm not saying she hasn't got bad qualities. Everyone does. I just happen to think in Hermione's case, the good far outweighs the bad. As for JKR being arrogant -- well, in her position, *I* would certainly feel pretty superior ^_~. However, I don't really get the feeling from interviews that she's 'arrogant', per se. Maybe a little 'difficult.' She has a rather infuriating sense of humor when it comes to answering questions. I wouldn't have her any other way, though. > Sorry if I offended anyone, but I suppose I'm entitled to my opinion > ;-) > Well, yes. But just FYI, it is customary 'round these parts to back up our opinions with canon (not that I haven't made the same error before, mind you). > > Can someone point me to some place where I can find interviews? > Try Aberforth's Goat - http://www.angelfire.com/magic/aberforthsgoat/index.html Or the Floo Network's Quick Quotes - http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/ Laura (who really ought to be balancing her checkbook right now. Sigh.) From rredordead at aol.com Wed Nov 19 15:50:25 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:50:25 -0000 Subject: Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85441 Chiara > I don't like Hermione, that little spoiled arrogant brat "I know it all", > never did, never will. > If I recall correctly JKR said more than once that Hermione's character > reflects her own personality; up to now I haven't read or watched a single > interview, as I'm a very late fan. > Is JKR that arrogant? > Can someone point me to some place where I can find interviews? Now me, Wow! First, check the Lexicon for all of JKR interviews. It's a great resource. Also go to Bloomsbury, the UK publishers; they have the interview at the Albert Hall, which you can watch. I don't think JKR comes over as arrogant at all. She seems to me as intelligent, charming, strong, opinionated and a little aloof, but I don't blame her aloofness as I imagine she never though she have a life in the spotlight. I can definitely see Hermione in her but I also see Harry in her as well. Personally I admire JK Rowling greatly. Her achievement, not only in the world of literature but also in Hollywood is appareled. To have become the greatest selling author of all time (if you don't count God and the Bible) is testament to her brilliance as an author, and to have risen to become the most powerful women in Hollywood is testament to her strength and fortitude. Not many people take on a studio a powerful as Warner Bros., and get what they want. As for Hermione, I like her. Sure she is an arrogant, little swot. What teenage isn't arrogant at that age? I was. Hermione is not afraid to take on her firends and challenge them when it's important, encourage them when they really need it and says no when they are wrong. Hermione is a far better friend than Ron could ever be to Harry, who is nothing more than a drinking buddy who agrees with everything Harry wants and does. Don't get me wrong we need all need faithful friends like Ron, but it's those friends that let us fester on the couch, (which is cool for about a day) when what we really need is a quick kick in the back side from the Hermione's of the world. We'd all be lucky to have a friend like Hermione. Mandy From belijako at online.no Wed Nov 19 16:00:15 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:00:15 -0000 Subject: Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: <000201c3aea2$505468f0$8a92aec7@Einstein> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85442 Iggy wrote: > I just realized... Wasn't everyone that was covered in the stinksap on > the train in the MoM "Rescue Team?" > > Also, Hermione and Ron were on the team, but not covered in the sap... > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't they the two that suffered the > worst magical injuries and required the most healing time? > > Could this have to do, in some way, with the stinksap? Me: Also, the only ones not feeling strangely drawn to the veil in MoM was Hermione and Ron... Berit From catherinemck at hotmail.com Wed Nov 19 16:16:07 2003 From: catherinemck at hotmail.com (catherinemckiernan) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:16:07 -0000 Subject: - Rabastan (was: The Gang of Slytherins) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85443 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katrina" wrote: > --- In Post #85408, > > Carol wrote: > > *snip* > >(I'm still wondering about his brother Rabastan, mentioned > >in another post. Anyone for an analysis of that name and its > > possible significance?) > > Katrina responds: > > While I could find nothing on "Rabastan," a quick search through the > astronomy sites for "Rastaban" turned up some very interesting > information. According to > http://www.winshop.com.au/annew/Alwaid.html > Rastaban is another name for the star Beta Draconis. It also > says, "The Arabic name for Rastaban or Alwaid is Ra's ath-Thu'ban > (1), 'Head of the snake'. Raso tabbani was a variation. > > [Hebrew name Rastaban, means the Head of the Subtle (serpent). In > the Arabic it is still called Al Waid, which means, 'who is to be > destroyed.'" > Then it lists traditions and beliefs associated with the star as > follows: > I did go Hmm, but I have another theory (don't we always). Rabastan is no more a common name than Rastaban, so why should JKR corrupt the star name to create it? Surely the pure-bloods care about spelling? Moreover his brother Rodolphus does not have a star name, and the pure-bloods do name their families in sets, whether the astronomically fixated Blacks, or the old-fashioned-feeling Weasleys. So I submit a theory for Rabastan itself, that links the brothers, and justifies the meaning (I hope). Rodolphus comes from Rudolf, which combines the Germanic elements hrod "fame," or "counsel" and wulf "wolf." Rabastan as his brother shares the hrod through Rab-, a corruption of Rob- (as in the Scottish nickname Rab for Robert), followed by the English/Germanic stan , "stone." This would fit Rodolphus as the thinner, nervy-looking man, and Rabastan as more solid and thickset, a bit less sparky than his brother, not getting the girl and as the Fourth Man enduring years of speculation over his identity in the Pensieve Trial. Catherine McK (If you wonder why you read a similar post on Fictionalley, it was me under my usename there) > Influence of the constellation: "According to Ptolemy the bright > stars are like Saturn and Mars. Draco gives an artistic and > emotional but somber nature, a penetrating and analytical mind, much > travel and many friends, but danger of robbery and accidental > poisoning. It gives craft, ingenuity, and valor. The Ancients said > that when a comet was here, poison was scattered over the world. By > the Kabalists it is associated with the Hebrew letter Mem and the > 13th Tarot Trump, Death". (Robson). > > General influence of the star: It gives loss of property, violence, > criminal inclinations and accidents. (Robson). > > With Moon: Blindness, wounds, quarrels, bruises, stabs, blows > (operations can be substituted nowadays) and kicks from horses. > (Robson). > > Interestingly, it twice associates poison with the constellation > Draco. > > Things that make you go, "Hmmmm. . . " From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk Wed Nov 19 16:24:11 2003 From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:24:11 -0000 Subject: Were we right? New characters? In-Reply-To: <97.40d9a8f6.2cecc967@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85444 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, kewiromeo at a... wrote: >> Do you think that she is going to introduce even more characters? Those just > really ruined our predictions. I think that they have enough characters and > the story has been so established that she can barely possibly introduce people > we don't know. I don't mean bringing back characters with trivial positions, I > mean bringing us another Tonks or Umbridge. > > What do you guys/gals think? > > Tzvi of Brooklyn > There is still a lot of potential for more characters. I think a number of characters have actually been already introduced - we just haven't met them yet. The most obvious example of this kind of practice was Sirius who was introduced early in Book 1 but who we didn't meet until Book 3. Principally thinking of a number of intriguing mysteries - will we ever meet the mysterious Florence? Caradoc Dearborn who disappeared entirely - he'll be there somehow because JKR is not going to mention these just as throwaway lines - well that's my thought anyway. There's going to be at least (potentially) one new teacher in Book 6 because even if Snape does finally get the DADA in place of Umbridge, then who will teach Potions for example? And no newly introduced teacher has ever played an insignificant role in the book. New students because of a new year? Perhaps. One particularly significant new student was introduced in Book 5 - Luna. I think it'll be dull if no new characters are introduced in Books 6 and 7. June From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 16:29:39 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:29:39 -0000 Subject: Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: <007601c3ae8f$697d94e0$9ddc5644@arlngt01.va.comcast.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85445 Debbie: > What do I think this all means? I think we shouldn't abandon all that Memory Charm speculation just yet. I think that something important is buried in Neville's head, just as I believe his parents have important backstory information that is being suppressed. As Neville grows increasingly confident in his magical abilities, he'll be increasingly able to throw it off. He's a *much* better wizard than Lockhart, and even he's regaining some memory. > Under the old Benevolent Memory Charm theories, Gran supposedly Memory Charmed Neville in order to protect him from horrible memories of the attack on his parents. I think the WW is too harsh for that to be a reasonable scenario, but the idea that Gran is affecting Neville's memory and using psychological means to keep Neville from realizing his potential, or from accessing information, is more appealing. > > The question, however, is just what she's protecting. Is it Frank's memory? Is there a secret about Frank that would stain his martyrdom? Or did she really think the DEs would return someday to pry out Neville's memories of what he witnessed when the Pensieve Four came to visit? I don't know, but there's lots of time to speculate before Book 6 is published. ;-) > > Debbie > who has believed in Memory Charmed Neville since first reading the books over two years ago Erin: You know, I was looking in Inish Alley a couple weeks ago, and I noticed that ALL the Memory Charmed Neville theories had been marked as SUNK. And I thought, "Why?" I didn't see anything in OoP that contradicted them. Sure, Neville got better at his magic and didn't seem as forgetful, but that can be chalked up to the presence of his little plant buddy. There was one time when Professor McGonagall said something like the only thing wrong with his work was lack of confidence, but people didn't realize Bertha Jorkins had a memory charm either; they just thought she was ditzy. So I don't think MemoryCharmed!Neville should be scrapped just yet either, and I'm wondering who it was that did. Erin From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk Wed Nov 19 16:35:21 2003 From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:35:21 -0000 Subject: Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85446 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chiara.fantoni at c... wrote: > I don't like Hermione, that little spoiled arrogant brat "I know it all", > never did, never will. > > If I recall correctly JKR said more than once that Hermione's character > reflects her own personality; up to now I haven't read or watched a single > interview, as I'm a very late fan. > > Is JKR that arrogant? > > Can someone point me to some place where I can find interviews? > > Sorry if I offended anyone, but I suppose I'm entitled to my opinion ;-) > > Chiara Personally I like Hermione. I was the school swot type too. While you are entitled to your opinion, I'm not sure I take your view of Hermione as being a spoiled brat. Arrogant, maybe, but spoiled brat - how do you figure this out? Come to think of it, I don't even buy that she is arrogant - this was the girl who went to cry alone in the loo when she thought people didn't like her. An arrogant kid would just take the line that people who didn't like her were idiots. Opinionated - yes, she probably is but not arrogant. I see no evidence that she is spoiled, constantly getting her own way - if there is a spoiled brat in the canon, then for my money, it's Draco: "Daddy - I wanna be on the Quidditch Team" "Sure thing son, lets equip them with new broomsticks and that should sort it". Hermione recognises her limitations - knowing that while she'll always be a great booklearner that there are other ways to excel - and that's by instinct and talent - like Harry does. As regards JKR, she has taken a fair amount of public flack in the UK -where there is an uncomfortable national trait to denigrate great success. I think envy tends to account for this in most cases. She has also developed an aloof public image - she comes over as a reserved and private person but also there was an episode of a tabloid magazine photographing her daughter and she (rightly IMHO) regarded that as an unnecessary invasion of her privacy. The reserved and private public persona strikes me as simply being self- protection. June From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 16:51:42 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:51:42 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: <20031119153417.34981.qmail@web20001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85447 > Rebecca: > Yes, but he was *trying* to act professional. He's > offering tea and trying to impress the boss. But he > isn't scanning the news that'll send his old > headmaster to jail "joyfully." He's just trying to > impress the boss. > > It doesn't seem the same to me. Erin "Just trying to impress the boss" is exactly what he's doing in OoP also... but Fudge is impressed by different things than Crouch. And, IMO, sitting in his seat casting sulking, jealous looks at Harry is not trying to act professionaly. More like childishly. I think its reasonable from Percy's viewpoint that he tries even harder to win Fudge's approval in OoP. After all, he's cast off his family, so the way he sees it, Fudges approval is the only approval he's going to be getting from now on. And Percy is someone who needs approval very badly. Erin From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 16:55:57 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 08:55:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Percey Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? Message-ID: <20031119165557.15315.qmail@web40018.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85448 19Nov03 nymphadoraotonks wrote: ...Percy has seen what a life of 'doing right' can give. His father has, for the most part, always done the right thing. Arthur has always been on the right side, and yet it has afforded his family very little in luxury.... Paula now: This reminds me of something that's puzzled me for a long time. The Weasleys are an old pure-blood wizarding family just like the Malfoys. So why has their status always been so low? Why does Arthur get such little respect in the MM? Makes me think that we've yet to learn something of importance about the political scene at the MM. I've always suspected that Fudge has a skeleton in the closet somewhere--look at his name. (In American English to fudge is to cheat a little, not quite follow the rules.) Also, have always suspected that Percy doesn't know or understand the significance of the political workings at the MM. With his ambition to reach the top, he'd easily fail to see or dismiss evidence of skeletons in the closet. Anyone pick up any hints in canon? ~Paula "Griff" Gaon Thanks to everyone who's voted in the "Which Is Your Favorite Creature" poll. If you haven't voted yet, please do at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-OTChatter/surveys?id=1151101 --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 17:12:07 2003 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 17:12:07 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85449 "Florentine Maier" wrote: > Sydney (84770) has inspired me to a new (at least as far as I know) > theory on the jinx that has allegedly been put on the post of the > DADA-teacher. > > I presume that it's not just a rumor but that the post is actually jinxed. > > I think the jinx could go something like that: "Everybody who takes > the job of DADA-teacher will come to grief because of his/her greatest > weakness within a year." > > Cases in point: > Quirrell: Weak will > Lockhard: Vanity > Lupin: Being a werewolf > Moody: Paranoia > Umbridge: Imperiousness > > Go ahead, criticize my theory, for the sake of progress of Potterology! > > Florentine ME: Nice. The only problem I have with it is that Moody (and his paranoia) was never a DADA teacher. So, that ended because the jib was up. LOL I like it though. Marci From serenamoonsilver at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 17:18:04 2003 From: serenamoonsilver at yahoo.com (Serena Moonsilver) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 17:18:04 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85450 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" wrote: > "Florentine Maier" wrote: > > Sydney (84770) has inspired me to a new (at least as far as I know) > > theory on the jinx that has allegedly been put on the post of the > > DADA-teacher. > > > > I presume that it's not just a rumor but that the post is actually > jinxed. > > > > I think the jinx could go something like that: "Everybody who takes > > the job of DADA-teacher will come to grief because of his/her > greatest > > weakness within a year." > > > > Cases in point: > > Quirrell: Weak will > > Lockhard: Vanity > > Lupin: Being a werewolf > > Moody: Paranoia > > Umbridge: Imperiousness > > > > Go ahead, criticize my theory, for the sake of progress of > Potterology! > > > > Florentine > > ME: > > Nice. The only problem I have with it is that Moody (and his > paranoia) was never a DADA teacher. So, that ended because the jib > was up. LOL I like it though. > > Marci Well how about his weakness was he's secret identity, he was really someone else trying to play a role? Would that count as a weakness that would bring him grief? Serena From catherinemck at hotmail.com Wed Nov 19 17:16:05 2003 From: catherinemck at hotmail.com (catherinemckiernan) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 17:16:05 -0000 Subject: AurorAlice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85451 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > Elfundeb wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84467 : > > << In GoF, there is absolutely no mention that Alice was an Auror. > Crouch states that the Lestranges et al. were accused of "capturing > an Auror -- Frank Longbottom -- and subjecting him to the Cruciatus > Curse" and further accused "of using the Cruciatus Curse on Frank > Longbottom's wife." Dumbledore says later when Harry asks whether > they were talking about Neville's parents, "His father, Frank, was an > Auror just like Professor Moody. He and his wife were tortured for > information about Voldemort's whereabouts after he lost his powers, > as you heard." > > In OoP, on the other hand, they were both described as Aurors. The > difference is so striking, I'm left with the nagging feeling that > Alice was promoted between books. >> > > After GoF, many people, including me, were under the impression that > both Neville's parents were Aurors, and canon-purists on list kept > 'correcting' us that canon didn't say whether Neville's (as yet > unnamed) mother was an Auror or not. OoP stated that both Frank and > Alice Longbottom were Aurors. I believe that that was JKR's intention > all along -- that us careless readers picked up on her *intention* > rather than her words. The same for ferocious Lily Evans defender of > the weak and feisty prankster Ginny Weasley the Quidditch ace. > I agree that JKR always intended to imply both Longbottoms were Aurors. There's also a potential explanation (other than blatant sexism) of why in GoF the DEs are referred to as going after Frank for information and then torturing his wife when he didn?t reveal it. Alice isn't tortured to make her crack (that's a fringe benefit), but to make Frank reveal the info. the DEs presume he is hiding in order to stop them torturing her. Alice herself is still on maternity leave (she?s in a public service job, some provide up to 2 years leave, sadly unpaid by this point) and thus not in the know unless Frank tells her, hence the primary attack on Frank. Catherine McK From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 17:35:30 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 09:35:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) Message-ID: <20031119173530.34723.qmail@web40003.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85452 19Nov03 "sanityescapesme1979" wrote: I do believe Neville will play an important role in the future books. ... because it's mentioned he is good at herbology. It has to mean something... "jtdogberry" wrote: ... Neville will not torture Bellatrix, he won't sink to her level. Paula now: Yes, I agree with both of these points. Neville's talent in Herbology HAS to be significant because he's such a failure at everything else. And of course a decent fellow like Neville wouldn't stoop to the level of the DE's. But really, somebody's got to put an end to the evil. I've always had an image of Neville cooking up something and maybe with a little help in trickery from Hermione putting the DE's out of commission once and for all! ~Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From magsthomas at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 18:41:39 2003 From: magsthomas at yahoo.com (magsthomas) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:41:39 -0000 Subject: Snape and Harry 2 (Was: Get yer piping hot Snape Theory...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85453 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Sydney" wrote: [SNIP] > If there was one thing that really took me aback in OoP, it was > this: that Snape really DID want the DADA job, in fact applied for > it every year, and that Dumbledore kept turning him down. I had > been cozily confident that the rumour was just that, a rumour, [SNIP] > I listened avidly to the webcast of the Albert Hall reading, and > found the answer to the question, "Why won't D-dore let Snape teach > DADA" intriguing and puzzling. JKR hemmed and hawed, then said it > would be a spoiler, then said that Dumbledore feared it would bring > out the worst in Snape, [SNIP] > So what did Rowling mean by "bringing out the worst in Snape"? Am just getting back into reading HPFGU since the OOP release -- the group's enthusiasm (read: volume posting :D) overwhelmed me and I quickly realized that I wasn't going to be able to follow the threads (even in digest form) or let my own mind ruminate over the plot very easily. But we've just been listening to Jim Dale's narration on the CD version and so I'm ready to dive in once more! I've read the book 2x, but am finding it awfully nice to have someone "read to me" -- brain fixes on different things when it's hearing vs. seeing :) Have read all the responses to this post and would like to pose one other possibility. Maybe we *have* seen at least part of the reason DD doesn't want Snape teaching DADA. What immediately springs to mind are: A) The very subject matter puts Snape in a compromising position wrt his status as a "double agent" for the Order. What do you think Lucius Malfoy is going to report back to Voldemort if a "loyal DE" is busy schooling students in how to repel dark spells? Plus it outwardly looks like DD purposely keeps his "suspect" faculty member out of a position that would indirectly enable Voldemort to infiltrate / affect the quality of the DADA education Hogwarts students receive. B) Snape's inability to suppress his dislike for James Potter's offspring would interfere with the DADA instruction Harry receives at Hogwarts. We've seen how quickly Snape deviated from DD's orders once teaching Harry Occlumency became distasteful / uncomfortable / invasive. His dislike for James runs deep -- deeper than even DD originally suspected. From our very first exposure to Hogwarts, Snape has transferred both his hatred for James *and* James' personality traits onto Harry. During the Occlumency lessons there was a brief glimmer that Snape started to realize there was more to Harry than he first suspected (am thinking of his inquiry about Aunt Marge's vicious dog and some of the other experiences that contributed to Harry's fears). But Harry's trip into the Pensieve -- invading Snape's most private thoughts -- quickly shut down that possibility (at least for now). DD knows that Harry must somehow become equipped with the knowledge / skills to perform DADA-related tasks (beyond his natural proclivities). Why put a man whose hatred runs so deep into an authority position that would put Harry at risk? While he trusts Snape, DD must also realize that there's a possibility Voldemort would try to manipulate DE Snape into influencing the quality of Harry's DADA education -- and that Snape's own hatred for James / James' son provides an easy ponit of access. So there you go...am sure there's more to it (as I'm sure there's more to Snape's background and ongoing activities). - Mags From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 19 18:40:55 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:40:55 -0000 Subject: Reflections On That Mirror In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85454 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol responds: > I can't believe I'm quoting canon to Kneasy, but here it is: > > "Harry had a thin face, knobbly knees, black hair, and bright green > eyes" (SS 20). If you have PS, I can't give you the exact page > reference, but near the beginning of Chapter 2, "The Vanishing Glass." > The next two sentences describe the glasses held together by Scotch > tape (this is the American edition, after all) and the > lightning-shaped scar. Nothing about the nose, but the knobbly knees > are there from the beginning. Something an eleven-year-old can relate > to, I guess. > Thank you. Yes, I had missed that. Pity it doesn't add "just like his dad." Might have made life a bit easier for the poor old theoriser. I wouldn't trust me as an expert on canon if I were you. I like to think of canon as, well, negotiable. When it supports my arguments I'll quote it ad nauseam, when it doesn't, it's all a matter of interpretation really, isn't it? Very good for raising other poster's blood pressures; lot of fun, too. But don't tell anyone. Kneasy From jmmears at comcast.net Wed Nov 19 18:45:55 2003 From: jmmears at comcast.net (serenadust) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:45:55 -0000 Subject: Percy vs Sirus Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85455 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > I'm sure Sirius' parents loved him, in their own way, and like to > believe it must have been just as difficult for Sirius to turn his > back on his family as it was for Percy. Despite the fact that the > Black family is stereotypically 'evil' and the Weasleys are > stereotypically 'good.' I love that Molly and Arthur are acting in a > similar way to Mrs. (and probably Mr.) Black. Turning their backs on > their son and refusing to talk to him. I also was thinking that we > witnessed the Mrs. Black and Sirius relationship after 20 years of > ill feeling and the embarrassment and slur of her having a son in > prison of 15 years. We are witnessing the Percy and parents > relationship at the beginning of their split. I'm not so sure that Sirius' parents actually *did* love him the way that Percy is loved by his. Arthur and Molly have not turned their backs on their son in any way, nor have they ever regarded him as the "black sheep" (pun not intended) of the Weasley family. Listen to Sirius, speaking of his brother, Regulus on p112 of OoP (US edition): "He was younger than m," said Sirius, "and a much better son, as I was constantly reminded." If anything, Percy is the favored son, at least from Mrs. Weasley's perspective before OoP. She consistently defends him from Fred and George's ridicule and makes it clear to all concerned how very proud she is of all his accomplishments up until the time he's appointed to his new job as Fudge's assistant. Even after Percy, in effect, disowns his family and reveals his contempt for his father's choices in life, Molly still attempts to visit him in London whereupon the lovely Percy slams the door in her face. Molly's shown as being utterly devistated by her son's defection. Somehow I doubt that Mrs. Black was still knitting jumpers for Sirius after he moved out of Grimmauld Place . Mandy continued: I also was thinking that we > witnessed the Mrs. Black and Sirius relationship after 20 years of > ill feeling and the embarrassment and slur of her having a son in > prison of 15 years. We are witnessing the Percy and parents > relationship at the beginning of their split. Whose to say Mr. and > Mrs. Weasley wont get as bitter as Mrs. Black after 20 years of > mutual hate. I can't really say whether or not Percy actually *hates* his parents (I really, really hope not), but I am very, very confident that in spite of his truly shameful behavior, Molly and Arthur do not hate him. Jo Serenadust From tamliv at worldnet.att.net Wed Nov 19 18:55:00 2003 From: tamliv at worldnet.att.net (Tamee Livingston) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 09:55:00 -0900 Subject: Weasleys turning their backs? (was Re:Percy vs Sirus Question) References: <1069256625.16175.14416.m13@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002f01c3aece$baea2930$29c50c0c@Omijosh> No: HPFGUIDX 85456 Message: 14 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 14:42:42 -0000 From: "ghinghapuss" Subject: Re: Percy vs Sirus Question Mandy wrote: >> I'm sure Sirius' parents loved him, in their own way, and like to believe it must have been just as difficult for Sirius to turn his back on his family as it was for Percy. Despite the fact that the Black family is stereotypically 'evil' and the Weasleys are stereotypically 'good.' I love that Molly and Arthur are acting in a similar way to Mrs. (and probably Mr.) Black. Turning their backs on their son and refusing to talk to him. I also was thinking that we witnessed the Mrs. Black and Sirius relationship after 20 years of ill feeling and the embarrassment and slur of her having a son in prison of 15 years. We are witnessing the Percy and parents relationship at the beginning of their split. Whose to say Mr. and Mrs. Weasley wont get as bitter as Mrs. Black after 20 years of mutual hate. << Tamee replies: When have the Weasleys turned their backs on Percy? When Molly went to talk to him and had the door slammed in her face? When Molly sent Percy the traditional Christmas sweater which was immediately returned? I have seen Percy turn his back on his family; however, I have not seen them reject him. In fact, it has been their overtures that have been rejected. I don't mean to be nitpicky, but this just seemed to be a mischaracterization of their behavior. While it is very possible that their relationship could end up as bitter as the Blacks' in 20 years, I don't think it qualifies as anything like "mutual hate" at the moment. Tamee (willing to defend the Weasley love) From tcyhunt at earthlink.net Wed Nov 19 19:03:10 2003 From: tcyhunt at earthlink.net (Tracy Hunt) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 19:03:10 -0000 Subject: defending RJL was: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85457 "tigerpatronus" wrote: > > > It has been stated before in this group that LV is too > cartoonish, too outlandish, with his crimson, slit-pupil eyes and > albino skin and swirling capes, to be the *real* evil villian. Let > us, for the purposes of this thread, assume this is so. > > > > But who, then, is the real villian, who is truly the enemy? > > > > Some offerings: > > > > > Who else? Who else? > > > And then Pippin responded: > > EverSoEvil!Lupin, naturally. I suspect his knowledge of the Dark > Arts is even deeper than Voldemort's, that he, like Lucius, > believes he can control Voldemort, and that Voldemort allows > both Lupin and Lucius to believe this is so. > > Pippin > who has just noticed that Lupin and Lucius have the same first > syllable, which is probably the weakest ESE! argument she has > ever made Now Tcy: (donning her secretly stolen (um...found) SLURP badge) As Lupin is the last name and Lucius is the first name - you'd have better luck tying Madam *Mal*kin (robes shop owner in Diagon Alley) to Lucius *Mal*foy, using that argument. ;-) But please, Pippin...keep trying to convince me that he's ESE. I do admire your tenacity. Tcy always happy to come to Lupin's defense - even if other posters do it faster and better than I usually could. From manawydan at ntlworld.com Wed Nov 19 19:34:39 2003 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 19:34:39 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Percy Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? References: <1069183365.5112.31270.m18@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000a01c3aed4$389e3ce0$67e66151@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 85458 Rebecca suggested: >I think you misunderstand my meaning here (either >that, or I misunderstand yours). I'm not saying that >what he believes is inconsistant (though it is) but >that his behavior is inconsistent. In GOF, he >believed "Crouch." But he was very cool and unruffled >and dignified. In OOTP he is excited and emotional >and frankly very weird. That's the incosistant part >to me. I take your point, which is entirely true. Percy's behaviour towards Crouch is very much an extension of his behaviour at Hogwarts. I could imagine him writing an essay on the uses of eye of newt with the same enthusiasm as his report on cauldron bottoms. So the question is whether the change in him in OoP requires a magical explanation (in line with the theory that he is under Imperio) or whether a mundane one can be construed. Possibility one: Percy does his best to model himself on what he feels is expected of him. Crouch and Fudge are two different characters. Whereas Crouch required an assistant who was as rigid and upright as he was, could it just be that Fudge requires an assistant who is enthusiastic for the party line, sycophantic to Fudge's favourites, and so on. I still have in mind my thoughts about how Percy is reacting to what's happened to him: he has a _very_ good reason to want to be in Fudge's good books. Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From sydpad at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 19:51:06 2003 From: sydpad at yahoo.com (Sydney) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 19:51:06 -0000 Subject: Snape and Harry 2 (Was: Get yer piping hot Snape Theory...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85459 Mags wrote, RE Snape and the DA job: > A) The very subject matter puts Snape in a compromising position wrt > his status as a "double agent" for the Order. What do you think > Lucius Malfoy is going to report back to Voldemort if a "loyal DE" is > busy schooling students in how to repel dark spells? Plus it > outwardly looks like DD purposely keeps his "suspect" faculty member > out of a position that would indirectly enable Voldemort to > infiltrate / affect the quality of the DADA education Hogwarts > students receive. Hmmm... the only difficulty with this is that Snape himself seems to want the DADA job quite badly, and (from OoP) is very angry at not being given it. If it was all about the cover, it seems odd that a professional like Snape would be so violently against it. Unless it's all a big act, which is certainly a possiblility. > > B) Snape's inability to suppress his dislike for James Potter's > offspring would interfere with the DADA instruction Harry receives at > Hogwarts. > DD knows that Harry must somehow become equipped with the knowledge / > skills to perform DADA-related tasks (beyond his natural > proclivities). Why put a man whose hatred runs so deep into an > authority position that would put Harry at risk? While he trusts > Snape, DD must also realize that there's a possibility Voldemort > would try to manipulate DE Snape into influencing the quality of > Harry's DADA education -- and that Snape's own hatred for James / > James' son provides an easy ponit of access. The problem with THIS explanation, is Harry's not exactly gotten the world's greatest DADA instruction so far-- surely Snape couldn't be a much worse teacher than either Quirrel, Lockhart, or Umbrige? And don't potions classes, which feature poisons and explosions, involve as much risk as DA? No, it doesn't make sense, if the quality of education was the concern, that Dumbledore would consider Umbrige preferable to Snape. Interesting points, but I'm sticking with my Jinx theory! Sydney From constancevigilance at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 20:20:54 2003 From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 20:20:54 -0000 Subject: Filks from the Young Wizard's Songbook, part 6 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85460 A couple more from deep in Moody's trunk: Pat-a-cake PAT-A-CAKE, pat-a-cake Shunpike Stan. Careening on the Knight Bus, as only it can; Poor old Madam Marsh is looking rather grey, And farmhouses and dustbins better get out of the way. Oh, Dear, What Can the Matter Be? O DEAR what can the matter be? Gilderoy Lockhart is mad as a hatter! He's Locked up, but subject to flattery, Still autographing with flair. His book is the last word on dealing with house pests. As Lord of St. Mungo's, he welcomes his few guests. He reads through his fanmail and never gets depressed - A perfect white smile and great hair. He once wrote a book called "A Year With the Yeti". But after "Obliviate" he will forget, he Was a wizard celebrity, Witch's Gazetty. He's now in St. Mungo's Day Care. ~ Constance Vigilance, who is so happy to see Pippin filking again! From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 19 20:29:08 2003 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 20:29:08 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Ginny Weasley's Birthday In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031119202908.77789.qmail@web25104.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85461 Udder Pendragon Hi all, I posted this question a week or so ago strait into a server problem so here go's again. Does any one out there have any idea when Ginny Weasley's birthday is? I have been trying to find it but with no luck. We seem to know when all the other main character's Birthdays are why not Ginny's. Or could this lack of knowledge be significant? Udder Pendragon ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --------------------------------- Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Wed Nov 19 20:47:21 2003 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (Eileen) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 15:47:21 -0500 (EST) Subject: TBAY: Crouch Redux In-Reply-To: <00a501c324dc$5b0eaf80$9ddc5644@arlngt01.va.comcast.net> Message-ID: <20031119204721.49444.qmail@web20420.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85464 "Hello, Debbie, Elkins," says Eileen stiffly, looking about the Barty Crouch Sr. shrine in the Canon Museum. "What have you been doing to this place? That hobbyhorse is a disgrace to TBAY, someone's knocked CRABCUSTARD all over the floor, and Debbie, you've been putting all our manifesto points out of order." Elkins shrugs her shoulders. "I've never claimed to be a neat-freak. My side of the shrine is mine to do whatever I want with." "Even to stick pins into wax effigies of Crouch Sr.?" asks Debbie. "Well, I wouldn't mind that so much," says Eileen, "if she'd keep the wax effigies in order, not heaped all over the altar. Debbie, go get a mop, and clean up that CRABCUSTARD, and Elkins, organize those wax effigies, or I'll do it myself. Actually, I will do it myself. You catalogue those posts of yours. And now, Debbie, what's this about messing up my manifesto points? It took ages to put them in order! And close the window. You can hear the people down at the Royal George! Ahhh! I can't think! Why can't you people just follow the rules and behave properly?" "Slavish adherence to rules is a refuge for the weak," says Debbie. "How dare you?" says Eileen. "Slavish adherence to the rules is the domain of the strong! The individuals!" Elkins and Debbie stare at her. "It's the easy choice, employed by those who lack confidence in their own judgment," says Debbie. It's one thing for Percy, who is still in his teens, to use the rules as a crutch, and quite another for Crouch, who is a head of department and a member of an old, highly distinguished wizarding family. See, for all his power and position, Crouch has never truly grown up." "Well, ok..." says Eileen, shrugging her shoulders. "But tell me, Debbie, where do you see Crouch Sr. slavishly following the rules?" "Remember? 'Mr. Crouch had complied with the rule about Muggle dressing so thoroughly that he could have passed for a bank manager.'" "Well, yes," says Eileen. "He did that. But what really stood out there wasn't his willingness to obey the rules. After all, he *made* that rule, don't you think?" "Wonderfully talented man, Barty Crouch," says Elkins drily. "Wonderfully talented," says Eileen. "You see, Barty Crouch wasn't peculiar among the Ministry wizards in complying with that rule. Everyone else we see, with the exception of Ludo Bagman, is quite as slavishly following the rule. They're just not doing it very well. Crouch stands out not because he's rule-bound, really, but because he's good at what he does. Which includes making the rules and looking like he follows them." "Crouch was so fanatical about rules that he cared about whether his *ancestors* broke the law," protests Debbie. "Oh, is that how you read it?" said Eileen. "I thought he was making clear that the family didn't own the carpet after it became illegal, especially since that would have been well within his own lifespan. If I announced that my family owned some prohibited object, I'd be quick to remind my listeners that I don't have it anymore, and it was got rid of before I could have possessed it illegally... Though, I wonder, given everything we know about Crouch..." "Aha," says Elkins. "So you thought that too!" Eileen spares Elkins a twisted smile "Yes, I wonder if that Axminster is still somewhere in the Crouch house. I wouldn't be surprised." Elkins applauds. "You see," continues Eileen. "I don't see any evidence, Debbie, that Crouch does slavishly follow the rules. He wants people to think he does, but where do we see him actually doing it?" "But it all fits, though, doesn't it," cries Debbie. "If Crouch himself saw slavish adherence to the rules as the *right* way, would he even understand the concept of losing one's right of self-determination? That's what happens to the rule-bound. They can't, or won't, think for themselves." Eileen makes a strangled sound. "It's most telling in Crouch's political behaviour,"Debbie continues. "He does what the mob wants - just as Pilate released Barabbas instead of Jesus. Crouch gave them Sirius Black and his son." "Was Pilate rule-bound, though?" asks Eileen thoughtfully. ---------------------------------------------------- Luke 23:13-25 Pilate called together the chief priests, the rulers and the people, and said to them, "You brought me this man as one who was inciting the people to rebellion. I have examined him in your presence and have found no basis for your charges against him. Neither has Herod, for he sent him back to us; as you can see, he has done nothing to deserve death. Therefore, I will punish him and then release him." With one voice they cried out, "Away with this man! Release Barabbas to us!" (Barabbas had been thrown into prison for an insurrection in the city, and for murder.) Wanting to release Jesus, Pilate appealed to them again. But they kept shouting, "Crucify him! Crucify him!" For the third time he spoke to them: "Why? What crime has this man committed? I have found in him no grounds for the death penalty. Therefore I will have him punished and then release him." But with loud shouts they insistently demanded that he be crucified, and their shouts prevailed. Pilate decided to grant their demand. He released the man who had been thrown into prison for insurrection and murder, the one they asked for, and surrendered Jesus to their will. ---------------------------------------------------- "That doesn't sound like slavishly following the rules. Pontius Pilate didn't follow the rules. The rules would have required, as he notes above, that he not hand Jesus over to the mob. But he does. And you know why? Because he was afraid of the mob." ------------------------------------------------ John 19:12 "From then on, Pilate tried to set Jesus free, but the priests kept shouting, "If you let this man go, you are no friend of Caesar. Anyone who claims to be a king opposes Caesar." -------------------------------------------------- "And that's where Pilate blanches, and gives in. Out of fear of being reported to paranoid Tiberius. He forsakes the rules for his own safety." "Eric Oppen said Crouch Sr. was protecting himself in the Pensieve scene," remarks Elkins. "Count me on Eric's side," says Eileen. "Yes, Crouch as Pontius Pilate works perfectly well, but not I think, to establish him as a rule-follower. Rather as someone who throws out the rules. I think Crouch's problem was that he had too few rules. I mean, too few rules he really followed. Doing what's easy versus what's right." "Well, that question comes up in relation to the Unforgivables," says Debbie. "Perhaps the question to ask is whether Crouch stepped in because he *was* a ruthless authoritarian, or whether he deprived suspects of their civil liberties because he believed the public wanted him to do so." Eileen throws her arms about Debbie. "You are so right! Listen, Elkins, did you hear that? You asked for motifs of protection and self-sacrifice, and I couldn't find them." "Darn right you couldn't," says Elkins. "In GoF, Crouch isn't associated with motifs and subplots that deal with protection or with self-sacrifice. Rather, he seems to be associated with all of the motifs and subplots that focus thematically on issues of coercion, control, domination, and the negation of volition." Eileen and Debbie smile triumphantly. "Through a glass darkly," says Eileen. "That which the mirror reverses, it also reflects." "Oh, come up with your own allusions," says Elkins crossly. "In a way, Crouch dominates the mob, as you've pointed out," says Eileen. "But Debbie's right. In the end, he's dominated *by* the mob." "I think his flaw is that he lacks any sense of his own self," says Debbie. "His use of others is merely an extension of his willingness to be used by others. He has self-worth only to the extent that it's reflected in the approval of others, so he bends to their will." Eileen shrugs her shoulder. "This is all getting very dizzying. But if I remember my Bible properly, aren't we supposed to love others as we love ourselves? If we don't respect ourselves, we can't respect others." "Exactly," says Debbie. "Welll..." says Eileen. "I don't see why Crouch needed to pander to the mob, anyway," says Debbie. "It seems to me that rising in the Ministry has as much to do with one's pedigree and connections as it does with public acclaim." "No kidding," says Eileen. "Don't you just hate when people think wizarding Britain is a one-person one-vote direct democracy? I mean, sure there is an election of some sort, but even in the parliamentary system, we don't elect our prime-ministers directly. My own guess is the Wizengamot chooses the Minister, just as the Witangamot chose the king." "He was "tipped" for the job," says Debbie. "In other words, the leadership had selected him as heir apparent. Sirius says Crouch rose quickly through Ministry. I think he rose quickly through the Ministry because of who he was - a powerfully magical wizard from an old family - and not because of what he did. He wouldn't even have had the authority to issue those edicts until he became head of DMLE." "Yes, I think you're right," says Eileen. "I mean, not that I doubt that he did a good job while rising through the ranks, but he had all the qualifications the moment he set foot in the Ministry. Unlike poor Percy, of course." "I submit that Crouch Sr., by virtue of his background and magical ability, was right in the career path to be "tipped" for MoM before Voldemort ever appeared on the scene. He rose quickly through the Ministry not because he positioned himself as a hardliner but because he had the credentials that the Ministry is far too fond of." Eileen nods. "Don't forget the languages." "Wait a second," Elkins says. "I hate to break up this love-in of completely inoffensive tipped-for-the-job Barty Crouch Sr., but being tipped for the job isn't enough. Do you know how many people are tipped for the job?" "Quite a few?" ventures Eileen. "Yep," says Elkins. She looks keenly at Eileen. "You'd know something about this? You've had an MP tipped as prime-minister for well on ten years now, haven't you?" "Well," says Eileen. "The current prime-minister of Canada is the Right Honourable Jean Chretien. He's making his farewells at the moment.When he resigns, the House of Commons will pick a new prime-minister from the Members of Parliament. In actuality, this means that the Liberal Party, to whom the majority of the MPs belong will pick the new leader of their party as prime minister. The new leader is Paul Martin. The heir apparent for years and years and years. His father was Paul Martin Sr. Very important and influential family. They own Canada Steamship Lines." "Paul Martin Sr. was tipped for the job, wasn't he?" asks Elkins. "Well yes. That he was," says Eileen. "But he lost out to Pierre Trudeau in the end. And what's more, this isn't Martin Jr's first shot at the job. Way back when, he took on Jean Chretien in the last liberal leadership convention. Chretien won, and went on to form the government after the 1993 election, in which the Tories were reduced from a majority to two seats in the House." "If being tipped for the job isn't enough for the Martins, why is it enough for Barty Crouch Sr.?" asks Elkins. There is a short pause. "What I mean," continues Elkins, "Is why would the wizarding world work any differently than our world? Being tipped is essential, but it only gets you so far. Then, you need to be a hardliner, or whatever it is that will get you all the way there." "Crouch wanted to satisfy the public's need for reassurance. But this was done to prevent vigilante justice from taking over, or a coup against the Ministry," says Debbie. "What about the trials?" Elkins demands. "The trials show that Crouch was indeed in the habit of sacrificing people to his political ambitions, and the Pensieve Four, guilty though they may have been, were indeed among the people so sacrificed, just like Sirius Black was." "But the evidence against Sirius was quite strong, and the Council *did* hear it," protests Debbie. "Crouch Sr.may have bowed to public sentiment to put Sirius away permanently without trial (or at least any trial he recalled), but he must have convinced himself that no harm was done because Sirius was obviously guilty." "So?" says Elkins. "He still sacrificed Sirius. He still deprived Sirius of his rights." "Not so horribly as you make it sound. And not for his career," cries Debbie. "Can you get that through your mind?" "I'm going to intrepret it as being for his career until you can show me otherwise," said Elkins with an irritating smile. "He didn't *need* the public," says Debbie. "Oh yes, he did," says Eileen quickly. "Not in the way we think of the public. One person, one vote, and all that. But I think he needed the public." "There's Karkaroff..." begins Elkins. "So what?" says Debbie. "It's a plea bargain, a standard prosecutorial tactic. And it's not a secret, either." "Yeah, it's standard, all right," says Eileen. "But it's not much of a hard-liner's approach, is it? And the nonchalance off camera does contrast greatly with the Bagman and Longbottom affairs." "What? Would you rather have had him use Cruciatus to get the information when Karkaroff so kindly *offered* to rat on his colleagues?" says Debbie. "YES!" shouts Eileen. "Well," she adds, a little quieter. "I don't necessarily mean I want Crouch to torture Karkaroff, but it would have made his character intrepretation a lot easier. You do have to admit, Debbie, that Crouch is playing two roles here." Debbie shrugs her shoulders. "Crouch plays to the crowd, all right," she says, "but not to become Minister." "Why then?" asks Eileen. "Let's take a look at the Lucius Malfoy. Quite revealing, that. Lucius Malfoy gets off. How much do you think it cost Lucius to buy the jury at his trial? And perhaps the juries of his sycophants and protectors as well? I don't think Crouch was very happy about it. I expect that it contributed to his, uh, overexuberance at the trial of the Pensieve Four." "Crouch battling corruption," says Eileen dreamily. "Isn't it heroic?" "Now, Bagman's trial. We know that Crouch despises Bagman - Winky tells us in ch. 21 that Crouch told her bad things about Bagman. We know Crouch miscalculated badly in prosecuting Bagman at all. I believe he took the risk, though, because Bagman had something Crouch resented - Bagman's charisma. Poor Barty Crouch, though, couldn't make himself charismatic if his life depended on it." There is a sudden hush in the Bay. "Errr... what did you just say?" asks Eileen tremulously. "He. Was. Not. Charismatic." "HOW DARE YOU!" screams Eileen. "FIRST PEOPLE ARE SAYING HE ISN'T SEXY. AND THEN HE'S EVER SO EVIL AND A HYPOCRITE. AND NOW YOU'RE SAYING HE'S NOT CHARISMATIC!" "Steady there," says Debbie. "Elkins, you agree with me, don't you?" says Eileen, whirling around to her. Elkins has a rather fixed smile on her face. "Crouch in his day would seem to have been quite charismatic. We never actually see him operating during Voldemort's reign, but I can imagine that he must have been really something." (1) "See!" says Eileen. "Well, perhaps he has a certain kind of charisma, which only the privileged few can recognize. The Percys of this world, yes? "No," says Eileen. "I mean, GoF Crouch Sr., sure. Of course, only the Percys of the world would be swept off their feet by him. But Backstory!Crouch Sr. was really someone else. He didn't even have the same persona as later. He wasn't even Rule Abiding back then in the same way. He was fighting the rule abiding people who wanted to continue on with habeas corpus, and no torture in interrogation etc. And he was popular according to Sirius. People were clamouring for him to take over. And he was using the support of these people to get him nearer to his goal to be Minister for Magic." "People who didn't have direct votes?" said Debbie. "Are you suggesting he was planning to lead the people into one of those bloody coups they're always talking about on the Bay?" "Is there any need for a coup in a society that's already almost fascist in its government?" asks Eileen. "Crouch Sr. doesn't need to be elected directly, coup or not. He has to organize a takeover. A very legal takeover. In which the people in power, the people behind the Wizengamot, support him as the new leader." "The people in power," says Debbie. "The gentlemen in the smoking room. Not the plebeian mob." "No," says Eileen. "Not really. But do we ever really see the mob? When we say public, don't we mean the people who have some share in power? I mean, people like Gran Longbottom. She does know people, as OotP proved. Those are the people who you want on your side. Crouch needed them. And he failed, I think, because these people went over to Fudge in the end." Debbie places her hands on her hips. "We'll see about that in a second. Anyway, Bagman's trial was a huge turning point for Crouch. Crouch clearly thought Bagman was guilty, but he also relished the idea of putting a popular public figure in Azkaban. He gambled that the desire of the public for retribution against the DEs would trump Bagman's popularity, and he lost. What happened at Bagman's trial, however, set the stage for Barty Jr.'s trial, in which he was determined to do what the public wanted, and do it very thoroughly." Eileen rubs her forehead. "You're right. Playing to the crowd..." Debbie ambled over to the votive stand. She picked up one of the crabcustard votives and sniffed it, all the while staring intently at Crouch Sr.'s portrait. "Did I ever mention the one thing that really sickens me about the Pensieve Four trial? It was those 'I have no son!' histrionics". "I should have thought that the kangaroo court itself would have bothered you more than the denunciation," said Elkins. "But there was evidence. See, I have absolutely no problem with Crouch prosecuting his son if the evidence warranted it. It was his duty and any attempt to let him off would have reeked of nepotism. But for him, it wasn't enough to convict his son. He needed to deny him publicly as well. And that's what cost him his political star in the end." Eileen smiles a little. "You know, I knew I had reason to be upset about that line.." "Isn't it pathetic that someone of Crouch's stature would find such actions necessary? Because he didn't need public support to keep his position. He needed them for his own self-esteem." "You know, Debbie," says Eileen slowly. "You have canon on your side. That new timeline has Crouch as Head of the DMLE until just before Harry begins school. He *didn't* need public support to keep his position. He kept it very nicely until Fudge pushed him out of it." "Yes!" says Debbie. "But I think he did need public support to take that extra step to Minister." "No," says Debbie. "He pandered to them so excessively so as to throw away a job opportunity that was his for the taking." Eileen shakes her head. "I still insist he needed the public. He needed people lobbying for him to 'take over.' And I think he had some reason to think that the Pensieve scene act would keep them on his side. After all, Brutus did well out of it. The wizarding world is *supposed* to be tough, steely, and Livian. The wizarding world let Crouch down." "Crouch didn't crave power," says Debbie steadily. "He had power. What he craved was love and approval. It explains everything - why he authorized the Unforgivables, why he acceded to public demands to convict the pensieve four, why he rescued his son." Eileen pauses. "It does too. But you know what Elkins said about Crouch and love?" "Not love," Elkins murmurs. "Not love," agrees Eileen. "Power. Power *was* love for Crouch. He would not recognize someone as loving him unless they submitted to him. Yes, he did crave approval and love, and he craved it in the form of power." Debbie shrugs her shoulders."Every accession to the wishes of others sank him deeper into the hypocrisy that would ultimately destroy him, because from the moment he rescued his son, everything else became secondary to protecting his secret. Crouch sacrificed everyone who cared for him to protect his son and his secret." "He had a choice," spat Elkins. "What would *Brutus* have done?" Elkins looks long and hard at the image of Brutus on the wall, then continued. "He could have made it humane. Far more humane than death in Azkaban, that's for sure." "Elkins! No! The Livian way is not the right way!" Elkins looked away from the painting at Debbie, who said quietly, "He had a third choice. A choice that would have released him from the tangled web of hypocrisy he wove for himself." Debbie looked hard at Elkins. "He could have turned himself and his son into the authorities. That's what he *should* have done." "NO!" shouts Eileen. "NO! To send his son back to Azkaban... Oh God, no! *That* would be evil." She looks at the spray of pink and white flowers that have suddenly appeared in her hands. Elkins began again, very softly, "Do you want to know why I think that Crouch Sr. was so terribly invested in keeping his son alive? Do you? Do you really?" she continued, beginning to spit out her words. "I think that it was because obedience was a virtue that Mr. Crouch . . . wanted to teach him before he died." Debbie shook her head gently. "But why? You yourself agree that at a minimum Crouch was talked into the rescue of his son so easily - something so incredibly risky to his career - do you really think he did all of this just to teach him a lesson?" "No," said Eileen. "He did it for love. Because he loved his son and he wanted to be loved back. Love was a virtue that Mr. Crouch wanted to teach him before he died. Only, Crouch didn't know exactly what love was himself." A tear rolls down her cheek. "It was heaps nicer than Azkaban," she mutters. "I agree with Eileen," says Debbie. "Is it not better to be at home, where one can look out the window, see the sun, converse with other sentient beings? How is this worse than being tormented by the Dementors in a dark Azkaban cell?" "He would have died in Azkaban!" protested Elkins. "Quickly!" Debbie shakes her head. "Under the circumstance, the Imperius Curse does not seem excessive. He *was* a convict, you know. And prison is *supposed* to reform!" Eileen studies her hands closely. "Robbing someone of their own volition doesn't reform them," she says tonelessly. Debbie gives her a kind look. "Let me tell you something about Crouh Sr. When he realized that his act of mercy had failed and would turn out to aid and abet Voldemort's return, look what he did. In a matter of months, Crouch Sr. was able to shake off the Imperius Curse sufficiently to *walk* to Scotland to confess to Dumbledore. He tells Harry his sins - Bertha, his son - punctuated with the mantra - my fault . . . all my fault. That language is straight out of the confessional - mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa. To do that while under Imperius - a curse that wipes away "every thought and worry" - was an extraordinary feat of will. It says to me that he had principles all along, but that he somehow believed he wasn't subverting them." "Or told himself he wasn't," interjects Eileen. "Because he has nothing to gain from this; it's political suicide, if not a ticket to Azkaban for himself, because he can't properly warn Dumbledore without fully confessing his sins. How ironic that only when it's most difficult, when his free will has been taken away by Imperio, only then does he shed his hypocricy and do the right thing." "Ultimately," adds Debbie. "I find Crouch Sr. to be almost as sympathetic as Eileen does, though I stop well short of declaring him to be dead sexy." Eileen smiles. Notes: (1) Shamelessly taken from a private email ______________________________________________________________________ Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 20:56:58 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 20:56:58 -0000 Subject: Neville's Gran In-Reply-To: <001901c3ae17$218e98a0$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85465 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" wrote: > > starmom513 wrote: > > I like your theory about Gran trying to pass Neville > off as a squib. Is it possible she knows something > about the prophecy and Neville's potential role in it? > Could she be trying to protect him from LV by showing > him NOT to be a danger? > > > Joj: > > I also think it's important that Neville thought his Gran would kill him when she found out about the broken wand. Was she worried about the cost of another wand or is it that she made him use that "weak" wand, under the guise that it was his fathers? Doesn't Ron say that his mother will "kill" him when she finds out about the wrecked car in CS? Surely it's just a figure of speech commonly used by kids who think they're going to get in trouble. I think Neville is just worried because it was his dead father's wand as as such is important to his father's mother. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 21:01:35 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:01:35 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85466 -"seraphina_snape" wrote: ...there is an age gap between the two oldest Weasleys and Percy. I always thought it was odd...>>> > > The Sergeant Majorette says > > Am I the only person that *doesn't* find that age gap odd? Most of > the nuclear units in my extended family are configured like that -- a > couple of "honeymoon kids" in the beginning of the marriage, then a > lull, then a couple more. I always thought it was so the parents > could yell at the 'big ones' if the 'little ones' messed up. > > --JDR Isn't Charlie only about two years older than Percy? Bill's age is a bit less clear, though I was under the impression that, except for Ron and Ginny, the Weasleys had a child (or set of twins) about every two years. Has anyone done a Weasley chronology? Sorry I don't have time to hunt one up. Carol From cristina at prodigy.net Wed Nov 19 21:23:51 2003 From: cristina at prodigy.net (crisagi1) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:23:51 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85467 > > > Yes, I always thought that just because every dark witch or > wizard > > that went bad, was in Slytherin House, it doesn't necessarily mean > > that all those in Slytherin House are dark witches and wizards. > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan ME: Not all of the bad wizards/witches are from Slytherin. Look at the rat... 'wormtail' Then again look at Snape... ok bad example, but it does go to prove that life is a matter of choices, and at any given time we have the right to choose to change if we wish. crisagi From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 21:21:31 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:21:31 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: <1de.1322f970.2cebe947@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85468 Hermowninny wrote: > > Many people seem to think Percy was under the Imperius curse > performed by Lucius all through OOP. The question I have is WHY. > What value would there be to perform this curse? > > Lucius and Fudge are very close. If LM wanted info about MOM > dealings, he could probably just ask. I don't see that as a > compelling reason. > > If LM wanted info on the Order, why would he make Percy sever ties > with his family. That just doesn't make any sense. > > I don't see Percy acting out of character. I believe he's just a bit > more comfortable to be himself now that he's out of his parents > nest. I see a lot of kids that remain strongly under their parents > influence after coming of age. Then, after a bit of time has passed, > realize that they are truly in control of themselves and feel free to > bolt away from their parents. I don't find it strange at all that > Percy "comes into his own" in OOP. > > Just my thoughts > -Hermowninny I also have my doubts about the Imperius curse (though I don't discount the possibility altogether). I think Percy's self-importance and the lack of appreciation he feels from his family propelled him on a course that led ultimately to delusion (worship of Crouch) and near-disaster after Crouch's death. I agree that his choice at that point was to stay with the Ministry and Fudge (against Dumbledore) or return to his family. He couldn't do both. But I don't think he's comfortable with his decision. His fight with his father and his thoughtless cruelty in returning the sweater his mother knitted show that he's angry and hurt. He wants to be right but senses that he may have made a terrible mistake, so he scapegoats his family. It's their fault, not his, or so he wants to think. Percy is, after all, only about nineteen in OoP--a very young adult engaging in a belated adolescent rebellion, but I don't think he's happy about it. And as I've said before, I think he's headed for much worse trouble, with or without an Imperius curse. It doesn't pay to be a BigHeaded Boy. Carol From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 19 21:33:18 2003 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:33:18 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031119213318.92477.qmail@web25110.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85469 justcarol67 wrote: -"seraphina_snape" wrote: ...there is an age gap between the two oldest Weasleys and Percy. I always thought it was odd...>>> > > The Sergeant Majorette says > > Am I the only person that *doesn't* find that age gap odd? Most of > the nuclear units in my extended family are configured like that -- a > couple of "honeymoon kids" in the beginning of the marriage, then a > lull, then a couple more. I always thought it was so the parents > could yell at the 'big ones' if the 'little ones' messed up. > > Carol says Isn't Charlie only about two years older than Percy? Bill's age is a bit less clear, though I was under the impression that, except for Ron and Ginny, the Weasleys had a child (or set of twins) about every two years. Has anyone done a Weasley chronology? Sorry I don't have time to hunt one up. U_P_D Charlie 1967, Percy 1976 based on Hogwarts entry dates. There is a Weasley in the lexicon which can be found at the leaky cauldron. Udder Pendragon ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --------------------------------- Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 21:32:16 2003 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:32:16 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85470 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tigerpatronus" > wrote: > > > Who else? Who else? > > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > EverSoEvil!Lupin, naturally. I suspect his knowledge of the Dark > Arts is even deeper than Voldemort's, that he, like Lucius, > believes he can control Voldemort, and that Voldemort allows > both Lupin and Lucius to believe this is so. > > Pippin > who has just noticed that Lupin and Lucius have the same first > syllable, which is probably the weakest ESE! argument she has > ever made Ah, the ESE!Lupin theory resurfaces, which actually is one of my favorites. Could you please summarize his nefarious activities? I remember that Lupin did not appear to be fighting in the melee at the end of OotP and that he convienently forgot to take his potion in PoA and turned all wolfy which endangered HRH, SB, and PP, but I know there was a lot more to your theory. TK -- TigerPatronus From rredordead at aol.com Wed Nov 19 21:37:30 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:37:30 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85471 Carol aksed: > Isn't Charlie only about two years older than Percy? Bill's age is a > bit less clear, though I was under the impression that, except for Ron and Ginny, the Weasleys had a child (or set of twins) about every two years. Has anyone done a Weasley chronology? Sorry I don't have time to hunt one up. Now me: No, I believe there is something like a 9 year gab between Charlie and Percy. The Lexicon Time Line has the dates of birth as follows: Bill - mid 1960's Charlie - 1967 Percy - 1976 Twins - 1978 Ron - 1980 Ginny - 1981 Mandy From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 21:47:43 2003 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:47:43 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Organ Grinder In-Reply-To: <20031119041839.60506.qmail@web41306.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85472 > "tigerpatronus" wrote:... > Dumbledore: > Clef: > > THANK YOU, Gods, someone else that doesn't think Dumbledore is that Shining Beacon of Hope. He does have that twinkle at then end of book 4, but more importantly I can't trust a man who had 11 years and more magic at his disposal than the WW's gov't who didn't do anything to ensuring Riddle's demise. No, no, instead he waited for a baby to grow to age 11 and demanded he become a murderer (Quirrell--not that I won't have killed him), be responsible for the well-being of everyone at Hogwarts (book 2 & 3), killing Riddle (5 & 6), and saving the world in general--but don't forget to hand in that potion's essay you know how Professor Snape gets. > DD has done quite a few things that seem best on the surface, but another, more sinister interpretation also exists for each one. For example: Leaving HP with the Dursleys (backstory and PS/SS): ostensibly so he wouldn't grow up the Boy Prince, but really this should have stunted his emotional growth and, in any other person but our wonderful Harry, would have produced a sociopath who would have killed without mercy, perhaps recreating Tom Riddle's tortured past in a *Boys from Brazil* kinda way. Withholding Occlumency lessons (OotP): ostensibly to conceal their *special* relationship, but leaving Snapey in charge of Harry's lessons and never even checking up or having someone else check up meant that HP actually received no training and was, well, an open book for Tom Riddle to read all about the Order and the DA and how to kill Sirius. The Organ Grinder has to be someone who is introduced early, otherwise the reversal will have no impact. Bringing in a new, hitherto-unknown person at then end of Book 6 or sometime in Book 7 would not have the impact of a betrayal. Also, in the logical vein, the Grinder is probably someone from the original Order who is reprising his/her role as mole / Secret Mastermind. DD fits this. Also, DD is the only one LV ever feared. Did Voldy fear him so much because DD was his master? TK -- TigerPatronus From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 21:48:41 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:48:41 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85473 > > Carol: > Isn't Charlie only about two years older than Percy? Bill's age is a > bit less clear, though I was under the impression that, except for Ron and Ginny, the Weasleys had a child (or set of twins) about every two years. Has anyone done a Weasley chronology? Sorry I don't have time > to hunt one up. In SS, Fred tells Harry that "We (Gryffindor) haven't won since Charlie left". That implies a quidditch season without Charlie. The twins are only in third year in SS, so thier first year must have been Charlie's seventh. The twins are 18 by the end of Harry's fifth year, so Charlie must be either 23 or 24. Bill could possibly be as young as 24, or as old as 31 at the end of OoP. Bill can't have been older than 17 when Ginny was born, because she remembers him going off to school. From salsal19 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 21:50:34 2003 From: salsal19 at yahoo.com (Sally Unchester) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:50:34 -0000 Subject: Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85474 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chiara.fantoni at c... wrote: > > I don't like Hermione, that little spoiled arrogant brat "I know it > all", > > never did, never will. > > > > If I recall correctly JKR said more than once that Hermione's > character > > reflects her own personality; up to now I haven't read or watched a > single > > interview, as I'm a very late fan. > > > > Is JKR that arrogant? > > > > Can someone point me to some place where I can find interviews? > > > > Sorry if I offended anyone, but I suppose I'm entitled to my > opinion ;-) > > > > Chiara > You are definitely entitled to your opinion but JKR also has her own way of showing us the people we all grew up with...I also personally like Hermione. She is not arrogant but has a little bit more common sense than Harry and Ron which kind of balances them all out. It's always nice to have people who you can just chill with and do whatever you want to with knowing they won't ever push you too far but its also nice to have the ones who push you because it proves to you many things that you may've thought you could not do. She is portrayed at first as being an arrogant brat but wouldn't you be too if you spend half a train ride trying to find Neville's pet toad Trevor (LOL ;)? Again,it was also brought to the table that she's just a normal teenager which is quite true.. Hermione recognises her limitations - knowing that while she'll > always be a great booklearner that there are other ways to excel - > and that's by instinct and talent - like Harry does. > > As regards JKR, she has taken a fair amount of public flack in the > UK -where there is an uncomfortable national trait to denigrate great > success. I think envy tends to account for this in most cases. She > has also developed an aloof public image - she comes over as a > reserved and private person but also there was an episode of a > tabloid magazine photographing her daughter and she (rightly IMHO) > regarded that as an unnecessary invasion of her privacy. The > reserved and private public persona strikes me as simply being self- > protection. > > June In my opinion,you have a point about Draco but there is also a softer side of him. He goes to search for Crabbe and Goyle so he obviously does worry and care for his own house mates at least. He,also,does not accuse Harry in the scene of COS but comes up with some other ideas making you realize that he may not hate him as much as is perceived. Also,if you notice in COS,when Lucius comes around after Draco is speaking with Harry,Ron,and Hermione,Draco backs down because it almost seems like he is afraid of his own father and I don't think he will become a death eater either even if his father wants him to. Sally --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "junediamanti" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, chiara.fantoni at c... wrote: > > I don't like Hermione, that little spoiled arrogant brat "I know it > all", > > never did, never will. > > > > If I recall correctly JKR said more than once that Hermione's > character > > reflects her own personality; up to now I haven't read or watched a > single > > interview, as I'm a very late fan. > > > > Is JKR that arrogant? > > > > Can someone point me to some place where I can find interviews? > > > > Sorry if I offended anyone, but I suppose I'm entitled to my > opinion ;-) > > > > Chiara > > Personally I like Hermione. I was the school swot type too. > > While you are entitled to your opinion, I'm not sure I take your view > of Hermione as being a spoiled brat. Arrogant, maybe, but spoiled > brat - how do you figure this out? Come to think of it, I don't even > buy that she is arrogant - this was the girl who went to cry alone in > the loo when she thought people didn't like her. An arrogant kid > would just take the line that people who didn't like her were > idiots. Opinionated - yes, she probably is but not arrogant. > > I see no evidence that she is spoiled, constantly getting her own > way - if there is a spoiled brat in the canon, then for my money, > it's Draco: "Daddy - I wanna be on the Quidditch Team" "Sure thing > son, lets equip them with new broomsticks and that should sort it". > > Hermione recognises her limitations - knowing that while she'll > always be a great booklearner that there are other ways to excel - > and that's by instinct and talent - like Harry does. > > As regards JKR, she has taken a fair amount of public flack in the > UK -where there is an uncomfortable national trait to denigrate great > success. I think envy tends to account for this in most cases. She > has also developed an aloof public image - she comes over as a > reserved and private person but also there was an episode of a > tabloid magazine photographing her daughter and she (rightly IMHO) > regarded that as an unnecessary invasion of her privacy. The > reserved and private public persona strikes me as simply being self- > protection. > > June From featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 21:55:36 2003 From: featheringstonehaugh at yahoo.com (A Featheringstonehaugh) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 13:55:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Snape and the DADA job Message-ID: <20031119215536.52980.qmail@web60202.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85475 Perhaps Snape's desire for the DADA position and Dumbledore's refusal of it may all be a charade; the intended implication being that Dumbledore harbors some mistrust of Snape. AF --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 22:04:25 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 22:04:25 -0000 Subject: Challenging Lexicon timeline (was Ron's dead brother) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85476 > Now me: > No, I believe there is something like a 9 year gab between Charlie > and Percy. > > The Lexicon Time Line has the dates of birth as follows: > Bill - mid 1960's > Charlie - 1967 > Percy - 1976 > Twins - 1978 > Ron - 1980 > Ginny - 1981 > > Mandy Erin: And I would love to know where that came from. In SS, the twins make it sound as if they were at school with Charlie "WE haven't won since Charlie left" That would make Charlie two years older than Percy, leaving a season in between for the Gryffindors to have lost. Erin From devin.smither at yale.edu Wed Nov 19 22:05:51 2003 From: devin.smither at yale.edu (uilnslcoap) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 22:05:51 -0000 Subject: Defending Ron WAS Re: Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85477 > As for Hermione, I like her. Sure she is an arrogant, little swot. > What teenage isn't arrogant at that age? I was. Hermione is not > afraid to take on her firends and challenge them when it's important, > encourage them when they really need it and says no when they are > wrong. Hermione is a far better friend than Ron could ever be to > Harry, who is nothing more than a drinking buddy who agrees with > everything Harry wants and does. Don't get me wrong we need all need > faithful friends like Ron, but it's those friends that let us fester > on the couch, (which is cool for about a day) when what we really > need is a quick kick in the back side from the Hermione's of the > world. We'd all be lucky to have a friend like Hermione. I like Hermione, too. But I feel compelled to shade Ron from the sycophantic (I would even say boorish) light you paint him in. Ron often understands what Harry needs (or at least wants) better than Hermione does. Look at how he brings up the idea that Harry mayn't want to date Cho just after their kiss. I believe Hermione's brain goes, "Harry's liked her awhile + They kissed = He wants to date her." Ron sees that the workings of Harry's thoughts on the subject might not be quite so simple and says so out loud. Hermione gives better advice about girls, of course, but it's often Ron who understands when it's pointless to pester Harry about something and tells Hermione to let it go (which, to her credit, she sometimes does take as the proper advice and which indicates that Hermione herself believes Ron can be right about how to treat Harry). Look, also, at the suffering Harry undergoes, when Ron departs due to their fight in GoF. That lack of emotional support is just as harmful to him as the lack of Hermione's intellectual support (due to petrification) in CoS for instance where Harry only puts it together because he's lucky enough that Hermione's brain put it together before she got incapacitated. He can't function too well without either of them. Ron also has not been incapable of disagreeing with Harry in the past. In OotP, he makes it clear that he doesn't believe Harry's accomplishments of the past four years were worthless or all based on luck even when Harry clearly starts to get angry. I'm sorry I can't think of anymore right now, but I am certain if I had the books in front of me, I could find several more. I just think it's harsh to say that Hermione's "a far better friend than Ron could ever be." I believe that question could only be answered by Harry and it's clear that he likes them both very much. I think that both types of support are valid and necessary to Harry, and that just because one prefers one type to the other does not make it true that one type of friendship is "better" than the other. Although I like Ron's variety of friendship more, I would never claim that he's "a far better friend" than Hermione could ever be, that's all. Devin From templerichmond at earthlink.net Wed Nov 19 21:46:45 2003 From: templerichmond at earthlink.net (canismajorette) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:46:45 -0000 Subject: Stellar Brothers Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85478 So, Sirius Black has a brother named Regulus. Until Phoenix, about this we were in the dark - the dark of the nighttime sky, one might say. Indeed these two brothers are named for prominent stars located in a relatively compact region of the celestial sphere. Sirius is of course Alpha Canis Major, the brightest star in the constellation of the Greater Dog. Regulus is Alpha Leo, the brightest star in the constellation Leo. Canis Major (Latin for the Greater Dog) and Leo (Latin for Lion) are located on either side of the sidereal constellation of Cancer, the Crab. As the celestial sphere goes, this is fairly close together. In fact, there are hours of the night when these two stars can be viewed at the same time. This would not be the case for all stars, some of which are on opposite sides of the celestial sphere and hence never visible together. The portion of the sky in which Sirius and Regulus are located is of paraticular importance in the ancient Egyptian religion. Recent research has shown that both of these stars were used as sighting guides for the orientation of sacred temples. The books of Graham Hancock, Robert Bauval, and Adrian Gilbert go into the matter extensively. Of course, they also point out the central role played by the constellation of Orion in Egyptian temple orientation, and that fact should not be forgotten. All the same, here in the Potter works, JKR has chosen to name characters for two stars of known esoteric importance to ancient Egyptian religion. Another context in which these two stars appear in relation to each other occurs in the works of 20th century metaphysical writer Alice A. Bailey. On p. 300 of her volume entitled "Esoteric Astrology," first published in 1951, she writes, "The influences of Sirius, three in number, are focussed in Regulus...." I'm a professional astrologer and an avid student of all branches of that art, and I have never seen these two stars discussed as related in any such particular way EXCEPT in this passage in Alice A. Bailey. This makes me wonder most curiously if Rowling could possibly have read this passage, or perhaps more appositely, if it is possible that she has NOT read this passage. Now, it certainly should be said that each of these stars has a rich tradition of lore and legendry associated with it. Centuries of astrological and astronomical literature attest to that fact. I have written a 420 page scholarly, nonfiction, study in this vein concerning the star Sirius, which by the way was first published in 1997, and which was written back in the dark ages of 1995 and 1996 when Sirius and Regulus Black were but golden snitches in the penseive of JKR! So, the idea did to write that study did not arise because of the Rowlian character by the same name. Even so, you can bet I was astounded upon reading JKR to find the hidden significance of Sirius so cleverly worked into a narrative that would captivate anyone willing to sit still long enough. This is one of the many reasons I am convinced that JKR has an incredible grip of world esoteric traditions, including some of the least known forms of astrological literature, which Alice Bailey's Esoteric Astrology assuredly is. The book I have written is still in print. It deals with the signficance of the star Sirius in Egyptian religion, the classical mysteries of antiquity, the Masonic Tradition, and in the works of Alice A. Bailey, who singled this star out as of immense importance to the cause of evolution on our planet. So, I submit that this passage in Bailey relating Sirius to Regulus bears further exploration as we seek to understand the greater implication of Sirius Black and his brother, Regulus. The influence of Sirius in the Bailey material is equated with the most sublime powers in the universe. On Regulus, she says a rather unanticipated thing. On p. 238 of Esoteric Astrology, she predicts that Regulus will eventually emanate an influence which will result in the improvement of conditions for children on this planet. Certainly the Rowling literature is improving conditions for children on this planet, I would say! Well, there are many loose ends here, and just the beginning hint of an Ariadne's Thread that might lead to the heart of the maze. Interested parties please respond. From BrenErik at aol.com Wed Nov 19 16:40:12 2003 From: BrenErik at aol.com (BrenErik at aol.com) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 11:40:12 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Were we right? New characters? Message-ID: <17949DAC.00471426.006FE85E@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85479 june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk writes: > I think a number of characters have actually been already introduced - we just haven't met them yet. I was thinking about this the other day. One character in particular that jumped out at me is Daedulus Diggle (sorry if I killed the spelling on his first name). He's mentioned by Prof McGonagall in the first book, meets Harry in the Leaky Cauldron where Harry remembers encountering him somewhere before as well, and then he shows up as part of the Advance guard. I'm very curious to see if, and when, he shows up as a larger more important character. From nibleswik at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 18:55:31 2003 From: nibleswik at yahoo.com (nibleswik) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:55:31 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85480 Jen Reese: > > Why does the Sorting Hat decision at age 11 mean you will have those > > characteristics your entire life? Fifty: > I haven't read my books for a while now but I thought that we know > that James and his friends were all in Gryffindor. And Snape was > Slytherin. Isn't that right? If that is right then that means that > Wormtail was a death eater and so not all of the Gryffindor's are > good. And Snape is good so that's another thing that makes it so that > being in one house doesn't mean that you will stay the way that house is. Me: I disagree. I think the qualities of the four houses are qualities deeply ingrained in one's personality. I think if you're a Gryffindor, you will always be a Gryffindor. That said, I don't think being a Gryffindor makes you good. Courage can lead to great things. It can also lead to foolhardiness. You can be evil but very brave. I particularly take issue with your description of Snape -- that "being in one house doesn't mean that you will stay the way that the house is." Even if it doesn't, Snape's a terrible example of that, IMO. Snape is SUCH a Slytherin. So he isn't evil. So what? Slytherins are not evil by definition; they're cunning and ambitious. And usually pureblooded. Snape is very cunning. He's also very brave, but I think cunning is his strongest trait. So yeah. I think he is the way Slytherin house is. So's Draco. So's Moldy Voldy. I think the houses have no moral alignments. Cheekyweebisom, who would almost certainly be sorted into Slytherin but is far from evil From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 18:10:21 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:10:21 -0000 Subject: Percy vs Sirus Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85481 Nikki wrote: > Hi, My question is this is there any connection in Percy, who has obviously gone bad in OoP being from a good family, and Sirus who is good being from a bad family? Is this JKR's way of irony or is there something underlying in these two comparisons, maybe that Love is not the root of all but friends and colleagues? Now Hermowninny (me) says in response: First of all, I don't think it's *obvious* that Percy has gone bad. In fact, I don't think it's happened at all. Now if Percy had become a DE, I might agree with you, but he did not. He made a choice to side with the "government," and his parents/siblings made a choice to side with a rebel (Dumbledore). Many people *could* say (not me, but others) that Percy made the responsible choice. And I believe that the two things you mentioned above are just more examples of choice being so important. After all, it's not our abilities, nor our ancestors, nor our upbringing that determines what we become, but our choices. This fact is repeated many times and illustrated in many different ways throughout all of the books. These two events also illustrate that you cannot judge a person by their family. You can extend that to say that you can't judge a person based on their school house association. Friends and Colleagues being the root of all--I suppose that could be said. After all, you choose your associations. The power of association is incredible. A famous quote, though I'm not sure who said it says... "You will be exactly the same in five years except for the books you read and the people you associate with." It's true in life and I'm sure it's true in the Potterverse--it you want to change yourself, change the people you hang out with. Hermowninny Though I'm not really sure if this made any sense. I kind-of got to rambling. From lynch at agere.com Wed Nov 19 18:04:16 2003 From: lynch at agere.com (zihav) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:04:16 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85482 First off, sorry if this has been mentioned before, I did a search and could find anything on it as far as Narcissa is concerned. I have been thinking about this since GoF. As the subject line says I think Narcissa is the ture spy for the Order and Snape is only the go between. Snape can't possibly go back to the Death Eaters he would be killed right away. Now why: In GoF when we first meet her she has a look of something bad smelling right under her nose. What if she hates her husband, but can't leave without leaving her son behind which she wouldn't do. She hates what her husband becasue what he has done to her son (making him a second generation DE) and wants to protect him from that life of going no where. She's the one who prevented Draco from going to Drumstrang. She's always sending sweets and seems to be the one more concerned about her son's welfare than the father. I think she has a lot of motives to be the spy and also she's in a better postion to know what's going on with all the Death Eaters and Voldermort than Snape at this time. JKR also said that Snape will fall in love at some point. What if he all ready is and it's Narcissa. This could explain why he treats Draco so well when he knows his father is a DE. If caught they could claim that Snape put a curse on her and take the fall and being good at Occulmency would be enough to get away with it. The only hole is in OotP where Kreacher goes out to the other Black family, but that might have been discounted as not being very important becasue he couldn't say anything about the Order. What do you think? Tom From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 21:12:43 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:12:43 -0000 Subject: AurorAlice/ThePortraits/Monks/Lucius/Phineas/JamesSnitch/SumHols/Houses/Flush In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85483 Berit Jakobsen wrote: Rowling would be aware > that it is a common notion that it stems from Hebrew > meaning "Serpent's mouth" (or "big-mouth"). I'm not so sure this is > supposed to be a clue that Rowling's Phineas was a parseltongue > though... According to Tom M. Riddle, he and Harry were "probably the > only two parselmouths to come to Hogwarts since Slytherin himself." > (CoS p.233, Brit.Vers.) Phineas has been at Hogwarts, at least as a > headmaster. Of course this doesn't have to rule out Phineas being > one, since what Tom is saying is that HE doesn't know of anyone else. > The question is whether Tom would have known if Phineas was one... > But, it is an intriguing thought :-) I always thought Tom's comment showed how pompous he was. I don't believe for a second that Tom and Harry are the only parselmouths to have come to Hogwarts in 1000 years. Tom Riddle needed a "Big Head Boy" badge. I also don't see how Tom would know of any other parselmouths. Since being a parselmouth has negative connotations, I can see people keeping that little piece of information to themselves. Since Phineas was a Slytherin, I imagine he'd be pretty cagey about his more unique talents, so Tom not knowing about him makes sense. For that matter, I don't see how everyone would know what talents others had. Wizards and witches do cast spells in front of others, so all of their abilities aren't secret, however I believe that most of their abilities are. (When I say secret, I mean from the WW as a whole, not from friends and family.) In OOP, Dumbledore disappears by grabbing Fawkes tail. The aurors and minister of magic appeared to have been caught off-guard by this move. One of them was even impressed and said that Dumbledore "has style". Dumbledore is acknowledged as a powerful wizard, so people must know about *some* of his abilities. However, does the WW in general know all the spells he can cast? The little scene in his office suggests otherwise. Yolanda From jjpandy at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 18:40:43 2003 From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:40:43 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85484 >Katrina wrote: > > Is this, perhaps, movie contamination? I found no reference in > SS/PS that Quirrel was killed. When Harry passed out, he was > holding Quirrel by the arm and Voldemort was screaming, "KILL HIM, > KILL HIM!" > > Dumbledore (I know, I know. . .) does say that *Harry* nearly died. JJPandy's reply: No, it is not movie contamination. Sorry, I don't have my books with me, but I remember being unsure of Quirrel's fate until in book 5, Harry and the gang were speculating on the new DADA teacher and Harry listed off the fates of the previous 4. It was something like "one dead (must be referring to Quirrel), one memory erased (Lockhart), one fired (Lupin), one locked in a trunk (Moody)". I know this is not exact and my apologies to those who want strict canon with page references. -JJPandy From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 22:32:11 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 22:32:11 -0000 Subject: Were we right? New characters? In-Reply-To: <97.40d9a8f6.2cecc967@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85485 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, kewiromeo at a... wrote: > ...edited... > > Do you think that she is going to introduce even more characters? > Those just really ruined our predictions. I think that they have > enough characters and the story has been so established ...edited... > > What do you guys/gals think? > > Tzvi of Brooklyn bboy_mn: You forgot one important thing that will demand the appearance of at least a few new chatacters; The Quidditch Team. The only people left on the Quidditch team are Harry and Ron; as far as I can tell, all other members were in their last in OoP. That means we need 5 people. I suspect Ginny will be one of them, so for sure we have an opening for 4. How many underclassmen do you really know? Other the the Creevey brothers and Ginny, I really can't think of any. Even in OoP, JKR mentions new people casually in passing as people who tried out for Quidditch. That implies we will meet more people than the final four. By the way, and I don't mind saying so, I repeatedly predicted that Ron would join the Quidditch team; score one for me. The next area that will revive lost/forgotten characters, and introduce new ones is the DA Club. My belief as stated recently, is that the DA Club will be the means by which all four houses are united for a common cause. Draco and his friends will start out in the DA Club, which I speculate will be re-formed as an officially sanctioned school club. Being a school club will require it to be open to the ENTIRE school including Slytherins. That should make for some interesting reading. But knowing Draco, he and his immediate friends will soon be kicked out of the club, but a few Slytherins will stay. These will be the proverbial 'good Slytherins'. So we need more characters to fill out the Slythering class roster. JKR has mention at least three Slytherin names during the sorting ceremony that we never used in the story. So that gives her a small head start on re-introducing them. And of course, there is the need for a new DADA teacher. Could be Lupin again with Harry filling in when Lupin is indisposed. Lastly, there is cannon fodder. If there is an attack on Hogwarts, a few students will have to die. In order for us to have some sympathy for them, they will have to be introduced earlier in the story. JKR is going to be busy busy busy. So... Quidditch Players - all houses but especially Gryffindor. Good Slytherins - and bad. New DA Club members - if thing go the way I forsee, there will have to be at least casual mention of new DA Club members. New Teachers - DADA, and other(?) New people at the Ministry - seems reasonable that Harry and the story will have more interaction with the Ministry. General Cannon Fodder - the quick and the dead. Conclusion: lots of new character. Just a thought. bboy_mn From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Wed Nov 19 21:31:01 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: 19 Nov 2003 21:31:01 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: <20031119173530.34723.qmail@web40003.mail.yahoo.com> References: <20031119173530.34723.qmail@web40003.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <1069277465.3264.3.camel@Bujold_RH> No: HPFGUIDX 85486 On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 17:35, Paula Gaon wrote: 19Nov03 "sanityescapesme1979" wrote: I do believe Neville will play an important role in the future books. ... because it's mentioned he is good at herbology. It has to mean something... "jtdogberry" wrote: ... Neville will not torture Bellatrix, he won't sink to her level. Paula now: Yes, I agree with both of these points. Neville's talent in Herbology HAS to be significant because he's such a failure at everything else. And of course a decent fellow like Neville wouldn't stoop to the level of the DE's. But really, somebody's got to put an end to the evil. I've always had an image of Neville cooking up something and maybe with a little help in trickery from Hermione putting the DE's out of commission once and for all! Angel: I'm not so sure he won't get an 'O' on DADA either, given the DA work. I have this chess theory (that came out of Lycoris' work on LJ) which I shall post later on this week. Basically it works on the principle that LV decided which of Harry and Neville should be Bishop and Pawn, neglecting that after 7 moves (books) pawns can become queens. Neville is moving onto the sixth square, and may take out a major piece in order to prove he really is a queen... (The rudiments are on my LJ angelofthenorth.livejournal.com and it begins in the chess game in PS) AotN From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Nov 19 22:45:45 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 22:45:45 -0000 Subject: Challenging Lexicon timeline (was Ron's dead brother) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85487 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote: > > Now me: > > No, I believe there is something like a 9 year gab between Charlie > > and Percy. > > > > The Lexicon Time Line has the dates of birth as follows: > > Bill - mid 1960's > > Charlie - 1967 > > Percy - 1976 > > Twins - 1978 > > Ron - 1980 > > Ginny - 1981 > > > > Mandy > > Erin: > And I would love to know where that came from. In SS, the twins make > it sound as if they were at school with Charlie "WE haven't won since > Charlie left" That would make Charlie two years older than Percy, > leaving a season in between for the Gryffindors to have lost. > > Erin In PoA Wood said, if I remember correctly, that they hadn't won the Quidditch-Cup for eight years. And because they hadn't won since Charlie left, Charlie must have left eight years before PoA. PoA played in 1993/94. That means Charlie came to Hogwarts 1987. He came with eleven, that makes his birth year 1966. I lent the book to my aunt, so I can't look right now, and I suppose I had a mistake somewhere in this. Maybe Wood said that they hadn't won the cup for 7 years, that would make Charlie's birth year 1967. But I know it was something like this. Hickengruendler From belijako at online.no Wed Nov 19 22:49:50 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 22:49:50 -0000 Subject: AurorAlice/ThePortraits/Monks/Lucius/Phineas/JamesSnitch/SumHols/Houses/Flush In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85488 Yolanda wrote: > I always thought Tom's comment showed how pompous > he was. I don't believe for a second that Tom and > Harry are the only parselmouths to have come to > Hogwarts in 1000 years. Tom Riddle needed a > "Big Head Boy" badge. Me: I think you're probably right that Tom couldn't possibly know about every parselmouth the last thousand years... But, and there's a big BUT; When Rowling makes Tom say it like that, I am sure she wanted to stress the fact that Tom AND Harry are quite unique when it comes to having the ability to communicate with snakes! Tom might not have done a thorough research on every student that ever went to Hogwarts after the great Salazar himself, but he points out the fact that he and Harry are sharing a very RARE gift indeed... So special, that they are probably the only two to have it since the great Slytherin himself... But, if Phineas also was one, it might turn out really interesting. Maybe there's a link between Voldie, Harry and the Black house? Anyway, parseltongue is NOT a common ability. And, it's considered bad... Berit From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Nov 19 22:50:24 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 22:50:24 -0000 Subject: Were we right? New characters? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85489 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > You forgot one important thing that will demand the appearance of at > least a few new chatacters; The Quidditch Team. The only people left > on the Quidditch team are Harry and Ron; as far as I can tell, all > other members were in their last in OoP. > This is not correct, I think. First of all, according to Ginny, only Angelina and Alicia left. That means Katie probably has still one year at Hogwarts. Then there are Kirke and Sloper, who replaced the twins in book 5. Okay, they weren't good, but that doesn't mean they won't be in the team in book 6. Ginny will probably replace one of the chasers. That means there is only one place left, and there are several candidates (the Creeveys, Seamus and Dean, even Lavendar and Parvati ot Hermione and Neville, although the last four are very unrealistic, I admit. Or what about Euan Abercrombie.). Hickengruendler From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 22:51:21 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 22:51:21 -0000 Subject: The Whole Evans Theory (longish) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85490 -Geoff Bannister wrote: > > > > Dumbledore appears to choose Vernon and Petunia for two > > reasons. "They're the only family he has now." (PS p.15 all quotes > > UK editions). Geoff > Tigerpatronus wrote: > I'll have to go home and look at that. It seems like all the quotes > here have quoted only the first part, "They're the only family he > has." Period. Full stop. And then there's your quote with that most > interesting word on the end. "They're the only family he has **now**." > > Time turners exist. **When** else did Harry have family that has > *now* arrived in LW? Could ME be an ancestor or, (gulp), a > descendant? > I think you're reading in too much here. The words are spoken shortly after the murder of Harry's parents. The family he doesn't have *now* is his nuclear family, his parents, Lily and James. I agree that Mark Evans is important and that he's related to Harry (though not a part of his family in the sense of a close relative like Aunt Petunia), but we don't need a time turner or a close reading of the word "now" to explain the relationship. Carol From tminton at deckerjones.com Wed Nov 19 22:47:44 2003 From: tminton at deckerjones.com (Tonya Minton) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:47:44 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Snape and the DADA job Message-ID: <8D5AD53268720840968E25CB71EC7CAE4626BE@djmail.deckerjones.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85491 AF said: Perhaps Snape's desire for the DADA position and Dumbledore's refusal of it may all be a charade; the intended implication being that Dumbledore harbors some mistrust of Snape. Tonya: Or maybe DD knows the position is cursed and he is protecting Snape from something disastrous. I mean look at Lockhart, he's a nutter!! Tonya (Who very much likes Snape and hopes nothing bad befalls him!!) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 22:49:50 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 22:49:50 -0000 Subject: Challenging Lexicon timeline (was Ron's dead brother) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85492 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote: > > Now me: > > No, I believe there is something like a 9 year gab between Charlie > > and Percy. > > > > The Lexicon Time Line has the dates of birth as follows: > > Bill - mid 1960's > > Charlie - 1967 > > Percy - 1976 > > Twins - 1978 > > Ron - 1980 > > Ginny - 1981 > > > > Mandy > > Erin: > And I would love to know where that came from. In SS, the twins > make it sound as if they were at school with Charlie "WE haven't > won since Charlie left" That would make Charlie two years older > than Percy, leaving a season in between for the Gryffindors to have < lost. > > Erin bboy_mn: In some of the reference to Charlie's Quidditch abiliy and the teams performance, it is pointed out that they haven't won for SEVEN years, not since Charlie Weasley was Seeker. Seven years of school plus the assumed last win in seventh year which was seven years ago creates a 14 year gap between Harry and Charlie. Harry was born in 1980 minus 14 equals 1966. My math might be slightly off, but it illustrates that the Lexicon does indeed have Charlies birth date correct. Just a thought bboy_mn From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 19 20:12:42 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 20:12:42 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85494 Master Clef wrote: > > I have a simple theory that maybe DD needed Harry, because Harry > shares the same darkness as Riddle that allows him to kill without > remorse. Harry never even bothers to think about that he actually > killed Quirrell, albeit indirectly. > Katrina responds: > > Is this, perhaps, movie contamination? I found no reference in > SS/PS that Quirrel was killed. When Harry passed out, he was > holding Quirrel by the arm and Voldemort was screaming, "KILL HIM, > KILL HIM!" > > Dumbledore (I know, I know. . .) does say that *Harry* nearly died. Geoff: You didn't read on a page or so.... Harry talking with Dumbledore (PS p.216 UK edition) "'Yes, sir. Well, Voldemort's going to try other ways of coming back isn't he? Imean, he hasn't gone, has he?' 'No, Harry, he has not. He is still out there somewhere, perhaps looking for another body to share..... notbeing truly alive, he cannot be killed. He left Quirrell to die, he shows just as little mercy to his followers as his enemies.....'" I'm not even sure that Harry killed Quirrell /indirectly/. That /is/ movie contamination... Previous conversation (p.215): "'...No sooner had I reached London than it became clear to me that the place I should be was the one I had just left. I arrived just in time to pull Quirrell off you - ' 'It was you.' 'I feared I might be too late.' 'You nearly were, I couldn't have kept him off the Stone much longer - 'Not the Stone, boy, you - the effort involved nearly killed you....'" Geoff From belijako at online.no Wed Nov 19 23:04:29 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:04:29 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85495 > >Katrina wrote: I found no reference in > > SS/PS that Quirrel was killed. > JJPandy's wrote: I remember being unsure of Quirrel's fate until in book 5, > Harry and the gang were speculating on the new DADA teacher and Harry listed off the fates of the previous 4. It was something like "one dead (must be referring to Quirrel... Me: Here's a reference from CoS p. 216 British Version (Dumbledore's words to Harry): "He [Voldemort] left Quirrel to die; he shows just as little mercy to his followers as his enemies." Berit From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 23:12:17 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:12:17 -0000 Subject: Challenging Lexicon timeline (was Ron's dead brother) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85496 hickengruendler: > > In PoA Wood said, if I remember correctly, that they hadn't won the > Quidditch-Cup for eight years. And because they hadn't won since > Charlie left, Charlie must have left eight years before PoA. PoA > played in 1993/94. That means Charlie came to Hogwarts 1987. He came > with eleven, that makes his birth year 1966. I lent the book to my > aunt, so I can't look right now, and I suppose I had a mistake > somewhere in this. Maybe Wood said that they hadn't won the cup for 7 years, that would make Charlie's birth year 1967. But I know it was something like this. Erin: I found it and yes, he does say seven years. Okay, I get that, but why is it automatically assumed that Charlie won the cup the last year he was at school? After all, Wood describes Harry as better than Charlie, and it still takes three years for their team to win the cup. Also, if Charlie left before Wood even got there, how would Wood be able to compare their flying styles? Erin From siriuslove71 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 23:18:04 2003 From: siriuslove71 at yahoo.com (Diana_Sirius_fan) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:18:04 -0000 Subject: Challenging Lexicon timeline (was Ron's dead brother) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85497 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" > > Erin: > I found it and yes, he does say seven years. Okay, I get that, but > why is it automatically assumed that Charlie won the cup the last > year he was at school? After all, Wood describes Harry as better > than Charlie, and it still takes three years for their team to win > the cup. Also, if Charlie left before Wood even got there, how would > Wood be able to compare their flying styles? > > Erin It took the team three years to win not because they were a bad team. The first year (Harry's first) Harry was not able to play because of the whole Stone issue. The second year Quidditich was cancelled because of the Monster of Slytherin. Diana From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Wed Nov 19 22:39:50 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: 19 Nov 2003 22:39:50 +0000 Subject: Snape as DAtDAt (was Re: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1069281593.3248.15.camel@Bujold_RH> No: HPFGUIDX 85498 Just had an idea. Try this for size for book VI (and I have plans for this little bunny...) Harry lands an 'O' on Potions*, and considers taking Potions, but is put off by the idea of being taught by Snape. He then finds out that Snape is taking DAtDA and that someone else is taking Potions, thereby putting him in a total quandary. He loves DAtDA and is the best in the school, but hates Snape. He also wants to be an Auror, and thinks potions without Snape would be bearable. There is also the possibility that it might be harder to find a potions professor than a DAtDA which is why a) DD took Snape on in the first place and b) is reluctant to lose him to DAtDA in which post he might last only a year, and would be lost to the school forever. c.f. the lack of good Maths/Science/Language teachers as most good practitioners go into other jobs. AotN *and yes, this is possible. It happened to me in Geography. I was predicted a fail and got an A*. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 00:04:02 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 00:04:02 -0000 Subject: Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85499 I do believe Neville will play an important role in the future books. > He will either be the one to murder Bellatrix, save someone, or find > a cure for his parents. I believe JKR should let Neville be the one > to torture and kill Bellatrix since she was the one who made his > parents insane. I cried when I read the part when he was in the > hospital visting them. The reason why I believe he will save someone > or find a cure for his parents is because it's mentioned he is good at > herbology. It has to mean something; why else mention it in almost > every book? Also, my question is: what is the deal with the plant he > recieved for his birthday (fifth book pg.186 American version) > Mimbulus mimbletonia? He says it himself it does a lot of things. > Also, it's the password to get in to Gryffindor Tower. If Neville tortures Bellatrix, especially using the illegal Cruciatus curse, how is he any better than she is? JKR has implicitly criticized Barty Crouch Sr. for resorting to the methods of the Death Eaters in capturing and punishing them. If revenge is encouraged and the murder or torture of family members is used to justify further murder and torture, where will it stop? The WW will just exchange one pitiless regime for another. If Neville kills Beatrix, it must be in a fair battle, with provocation and without resorting to her methods. He must prove that he's better than she is morally as well as magically, a genuine triumph of good over evil, for his victory to have any significance. I agree with you that Mimbulus mimbletonia will prove significant. Victory through herbology? We'll see. Carol From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Wed Nov 19 23:14:57 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:14:57 -0000 Subject: AurorAlice/ThePortraits/Monks/Lucius/Phineas/JamesSnitch/SumHols/Houses/Flush In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85500 Berit wrote: > I think you're probably right that Tom couldn't possibly know about > every parselmouth the last thousand years... But, and there's a big > BUT; When Rowling makes Tom say it like that, I am sure she wanted to > stress the fact that Tom AND Harry are quite unique when it comes to > having the ability to communicate with snakes! Anyway, parseltongue is NOT a common ability. And, it's > considered bad... I realize that JKR was pointing out how unique they are in the WW and that the two of them share a very rare ability. However, I wanted to caution everyone against taking Tom's statment as canonical fact. Yolanda From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 01:15:06 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 01:15:06 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85501 tigerpatronus wrote: > > It has been stated before in this group that LV is too cartoonish, > too outlandish, with his crimson, slit-pupil eyes and albino skin and > swirling capes, to be the *real* evil villian. Let us, for the > purposes of this thread, assume this is so. > > But who, then, is the real villian, who is truly the enemy? > > Some offerings: > > Lucius Malfoy: who may be pulling Fudge's strings at the MoM. > > Fudge: who isn't as thick as he seems to be. > > Dumbledore: who gives Harry just enough info to make the wrong > decision every time, and in whose eyes that enigmatic triumph glinted > upon LV's return to the corporal. Re Dumbledore: He has actually given Harry just enough information to *succeed* every time except the last, and it's Dumbledore who rescues Harry from Voldemort and Bellatrix in the battle at the MoM. He also provides the Phoenix and the sword in CS. (Of course, Harry was helped out in GoF by Lupin, who taught him how to deal with boggarts and Dementors and indirectly by Snape, who taught him the Expelliarmus spell in the Duelling Club scene of CS, but that doesn't make Dumbledore at fault for not providing this information himself.) I admit that Dumbledore has been wrong a surprising number of times (regarding Sirius and Imposter!Moody, most notably), but that doesn't make him evil. In fact, if he were omniscient and omnipotent, he'd be a pretty dull character--and there'd be no need for a battle between Harry and Voldemort. I do with that LV still looked like Tom Riddle. He might seem more like the "real" villain then. But he's been directly responsible for enough murders, starting with Moaning Myrtle and his own parents, to qualify for full villain status. At this point, though, he seems to me more like a serial killer/mass murderer (with willing accomplices who are equally evil) than a threat to the whole WW (with Muggle England thrown in for starters). His "weapon" in OoP turned out to be a prophecy and the giants turned out to be more dangerous to themselves than to wizards or Muggles. So far all he has is about a dozen unimprisoned Death Eaters (one of whom has a silver hand), Nagini, and the Dementors, who may be as difficult for him to control as they were for Fudge. So where do I stand? I think LV *is* the real villain (after all, only Harry can kill him), but I think we'll see a lot more of the Dementors and Lucius Malfoy. Fudge, on the other hand, is a puppet or a nonentity, who has made so many mistakes that his chances of retaining his post as Minister of Magic are equally slim no matter who wins VW2 (and since we know that at least some of the main characters will survive to have their futures summarized in the Epilogue to Book 7, it's a safe bet that the winner won't be Voldemort.) Carol From Lolatsukino at aol.com Wed Nov 19 23:43:01 2003 From: Lolatsukino at aol.com (Kelly) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:43:01 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: <20031119213318.92477.qmail@web25110.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85502 The Sergeant Majorette says >>Am I the only person that *doesn't* find that age gap odd? Most of the nuclear units in my extended family are configured like that>> A valid point. I have 3 siblings myself, and the one closest to me in age (my sister) is 16 years older than I. My mother didn't give birth to any still borns during that time frame, nor did she miscarry. In her case she had simply intended on having no more children after my sister was born. My birth was simply unplanned. I think it's plausible that Mr. and Mrs. Weasley faced the same situation in which they were happy with the children they had, but just ended up having more children than they planned. Admittedly it is quite a few unplanned pregnancies, but it's still a possiblity. After all, sometimes the simplest explanation is the correct one. Kelly From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 00:14:32 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 00:14:32 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85503 > But if he were to leave Hogwarts at the end of > Book 7, I wonder where else he could go (other than > rejoining the dark side, which I'm sure he won't do). > Maybe the Department of Mysteries could use his talents. I'd always noticed that he was referred to as "Potions Master". I'd supposed "Master" was a title that he'd had to achieve a very high level of proficiency to earn. In POA, when Lupin receives the wolfsbane potion, he says that he was "lucky to be working alongside Professor Snape", because "there aren't many wizards who are up to making it". My point is that someone with Snape's skills and education shouldn't have trouble finding a post in the WW. I admit his DE past might hinder him, but I don't think it would keep him from finding employment, especially since he's been acquitted for over 15 years. Yolanda From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Thu Nov 20 01:32:18 2003 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 20:32:18 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Challenging Lexicon timeline (was Ron's dead brother) Message-ID: <3598EC6B.60F03579.4B073798@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85504 Erin wrote: And I would love to know where that came from. In SS, the twins make it sound as if they were at school with Charlie "WE haven't won since Charlie left" That would make Charlie two years older than Percy, leaving a season in between for the Gryffindors to have lost. Now Oryomai: Just saying "We haven't won since Charlie left" doesn't mean anything. I say things like "We haven't won PIMBA since Amanda left!" (It's a marching band thing...) But I wasn't in band when she was. "We" can just mean the team/House itself. To give this some canon, I think that the Dead Weasley will be true. This could explain why Mr. Weasley describes seeing the Dark Mark over a house so well. Oryomai From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Wed Nov 19 23:52:39 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 17:52:39 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Stellar Brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c3aef8$389c5dc0$5393aec7@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 85505 >Indeed these two brothers are named for prominent stars located in a >relatively compact region of the celestial sphere.? Sirius is of >course Alpha Canis Major, the brightest star in the constellation of >the Greater Dog.? Regulus is Alpha Leo, the brightest star in the >constellation Leo.? Canis Major (Latin for the Greater Dog) and Leo >(Latin for Lion) Iggy here: This info makes it all the more significant that Sirius's chosen Anumagus form was a large, midnight black dog... doesn't it? *grin* One would also be inclined to wonder if Regulus was an Animagus as well, and whether his alternate form was a lion. >Canismajorette >I'm a professional astrologer and an avid student of all branches of >that art Iggy here: Here's an interesting thing for you then... How would you describe someone with 5 elemental points in earth, 5 in water, 3 in air, and none in fire? *grin* Iggy McSnurd From hieya at hotmail.com Thu Nov 20 01:56:20 2003 From: hieya at hotmail.com (greatlit2003) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 01:56:20 -0000 Subject: Predictions: The children's future careers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85506 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote: > So I agree with you that it will be Neville. But, just curious, why > potions? Do you think Snape will die, or get the DADA job, or what? > Personally, I think Neville teaching DADA or Herbology is more likely. > > Erin I think that Neville would be better at Potions if he had a less intimidating teacher. Harry noticed that Neville looked calmer and happier during the Potions O.W.L. where Snape wasn't present. Plus, I would like to see Snape as the DADA teacher. greatlit2003 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 01:55:20 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 01:55:20 -0000 Subject: What if Harry dies? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85507 "Geoff Bannister" wrote: My second point, which is more germane to Harry, is that, in "The Last Battle", the characters' POV goes over with them into the new heaven. As I said a day or so ago, if Harry dies, then there has to be an awkward shift in the POV at this point. If it were to happen then whether we switch to an authorial/narrative view would have to be seen. I realise that there are books where the leading character dies and the point of view is carried up to that point ("A Tale of Two Cities" comes to mind) but the narrative stops there. For Harry to die and the book come to a full stop seems to be unlikely; it would be too abrupt and would lack a full closure. Maus argued" > But there have already been instances in the HP books where other > points of view were used. The first chapter of PS/SS was mostly from > the perspective of Uncle Vernon, and the first chapter of GoF was a > combination of an all-knowing and Frank Bryce's point of view. > > I'm sorry, but the limited third person POV used by JKR will not save > Harry from dying. > > Maus (who loves a good drama with plenty of deaths) Also we've been promised an epilogue, and epilogues are generally written from a third-person omniscient point of view (as opposed to third-person limited). If the narrator is simply generalizing about what happens to the characters who survive the war, there's no need to get inside Harry's head (or anyone else's). (Think of "All Quiet on the Western Front," where the reader is tricked by the first-person present-tense narration, only to have the protagonist's death coldly reported in past tense by an objective third-person narrator. There's a book I could have thrown across the room!) Maus mentioned two instances of JKR using a POV other than Harry's. I can think of one other instance when JKR, ever so briefly, slips out of Harry's POV: her reference to Neville lying awake, unknown to Harry, on the night after Imposter!Moody demonstrated the Cruciatus curse on the spider. So I have to agree with Maus on the POV, but absolutely *not* on the way the book ought to end. (I'm with you there, Geoff!) I've already given a number of reasons why I think JKR won't kill Harry and suggested some possible alternative endings that would require more imagination than killing him off (which is altogether too easy, as the number of authors who have taken that route ought to indicate), so I won't bore/annoy list members who vehemently disagree with me by repeating those arguments. But I have to concede them the POV. Whether Harry dies or not, JKR has promised to tell us the fates of the other characters, and that requires an objective third-person epilogue. Carol From psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 01:35:43 2003 From: psychobirdgirl at yahoo.com (psychobirdgirl) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 01:35:43 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85508 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kelly" wrote: > Admittedly it is quite a few unplanned pregnancies, but it's still > a possiblity. After all, sometimes the simplest explanation is the > correct one. > > Kelly psychobirdgirl(me): Maybe only the first, Percy, was unplanned and after him they just decided that more was good, and kept on going. psychobirdgirl From patnkatng at cox.net Thu Nov 20 02:16:05 2003 From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 02:16:05 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85509 > > >Katrina wrote: > > I found no reference in > > > SS/PS that Quirrel was killed. > > > JJPandy's wrote: > I remember being unsure of Quirrel's fate until in book 5, > > Harry and the gang were speculating on the new DADA teacher and > Harry listed off the fates of the previous 4. It was something > like "one dead (must be referring to Quirrel... > > Berit wrote: > > Here's a reference from CoS p. 216 British Version (Dumbledore's > words to Harry): > "He [Voldemort] left Quirrel to die; he shows just as little mercy to > his followers as his enemies." > Katrina again: OK, but -as Geoff pointed out in #85494 - there's still no evidence that *Harry* killed Quirrell. It could have been Dumbledore. It could have been the shock of Voldemort leaving his body, for that matter. It could have been the Unicorn blood catching up with him, for all we know. My suspicion is that the reason Quirrell's death is not on Harry's conscience is because it has never occurred to him that he might have been the cause. Just keeping things lively. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 02:35:21 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 02:35:21 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85510 > Jen R wrote: It's not that I don't think MWPP have characteristics of > Gryffindors, I just wouldn't be *surprised* to find out they were > Slytherin. Slytherins are resourceful, determined, and have "a > certain disregard for rules" as DD tells Harry in COS (US, chap. 18, > p. 333). Becoming illegal animagi certainly fits that description. > Making a complex Map of Hogwarts was certainly resourceful. > > And the Order is, if nothing else, full of resourceful people with a > certain disregard for the rules! Jen, I know you are only considering the possibility that MWPP may have been in Slytherin and that you also see the evidence that they may belong in Gryffindor, so I just want to add a few points to Huntergreen's argument (which I snipped but agree with). The people we know best who have "a certain disregard for rules" are Harry himself and Ron (now joined by Hermione)--all Gryffindors. I'm pretty certain that Sirius, who empathizes so strongly with Harry and sees him almost as a reincarnation of James, would not feel that way if he and James (and Remus and Peter) had not also been Gryffindors. The member of the Order with the highest regard for rules is, of all people, Snape, that notorious giver of detention to rule breakers who happens to be Head of Slytherin. Also as Huntergreen said (and as I noted in another post), we see no evidence of the quintessential Slytherin trait, ambition, in Sirius or James (both of whom are rich--JKR has said in interviews that James's wealth is inherited). Unlike Snape, who put everything he has into that lengthy response to the DADA exam, James, Sirius, and Remus take it almost as a joke (the werewolf remarks, remember?). And poor Remus--what kind of ambition can he have, given the universal (and not entirely unjustified) prejudice against werewolves? Anyway, I sympathize with you in wanting to clear up the misconception (which is partly the result of Harry's POV) that all Slytherins are evil, but I don't think that the MWPP are Slytherins. They're somewhat recklessly brave and not at all ambitious. Their disregard for rules doesn't automatically put them in Slytherin any more than it kept Snape out. His ambition (and perhaps his fascination for the dark arts) put him in Slytherin; their courage (and perhaps their antipathy to the dark arts) put them (almost certainly) in Gryffindor. I think putting them in Gryffindor would actually help your argument that Gryffindors are not necessarily "good" and Slytherins are not necessarily "evil." Who better than MWPP to show that imperfect people ("arrogant little berks"!) can be assigned to Gryffindor? (Percy, too, but that's a whole 'nother thread.) And Snape, for all his faults, shows that it's possible to be a "good" Slytherin. I'm still holding out for Theodore Nott to follow his lead--or possibly the mysterious Blaise Zabini. (Draco, I fear, will follow in his father's footsteps and quite possibly come to a nasty end.) But regardless of whether we find another "good Sytherin" or not, and despite my hope that you're right about the houses not being innately good or evil, MWPP, as far as I can tell based on logic and the available evidence, belong in Gryffindor. Carol From grossl at kenyon.edu Wed Nov 19 22:18:44 2003 From: grossl at kenyon.edu (gmail11220) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 22:18:44 -0000 Subject: Why do you like Harry Potter? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85511 I am a senior at Kenyon College and I am doing a research paper for my senior project on the role of fantasy and magic in our society. I am sure this question has come up many, many times. I am new to this group so I do not know what has been said. Why do you like the Harry Potter Books? I have read all the books myself but I am interested in what other people think. This would greatly help my project. Thank you. From madoushi_clef_00 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 02:49:08 2003 From: madoushi_clef_00 at yahoo.com (Master Clef) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 18:49:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Dumbledore, Organ Grinder (Fair is foul and foul is fair.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031120024908.7348.qmail@web41313.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85512 tigerpatronus wrote:... >>DD has done quite a few things that seem best on the surface, but another, more sinister interpretation also exists for each one. For example: Leaving HP with the Dursleys (backstory and PS/SS): ostensibly so he wouldn't grow up the Boy Prince, but really this should have stunted his emotional growth and, in any other person but our wonderful Harry, would have produced a sociopath who would have killed without mercy, perhaps recreating Tom Riddle's tortured past in a *Boys from Brazil* kinda way. << Clef: I agree, it should have stunted his emotional growth, or produced a quiet, emotionally abused, flinching at human contact boy. (Not quite a sociopath, humans are very rarely true sociopaths, more like missing a piece here and there, or ignoring the rules, but they do understand the rules.) >>Withholding Occlumency lessons (OotP): ostensibly to conceal their *special* relationship, but leaving Snapey in charge of Harry's lessons and never even checking up or having someone else check up meant that HP actually received no training and was, well, an open book for Tom Riddle to read all about the Order and the DA and how to kill Sirius. << Clef: Part of me believes that Dumbldore meant to have Riddle read Harry's mind (e.g. "come...find the weapon... come out and find the weapon, show yourself to the Ministry...") as well as use Harry's connection for his own gain (mainly, "He's trying to get through this door, where the walls spin..." and in Aurthur Weasley's case "Oh, Riddle's almost there, okay, plan g can go into effect..."). >>The Organ Grinder has to be someone who is introduced early, otherwise the reversal will have no impact. Bringing in a new, hitherto-unknown person at then end of Book 6 or sometime in Book 7 would not have the impact of a betrayal.<< Agreed. If, say, it was Mark Evans, via time-turner, it just wouldn't feel right. DD, maybe Snape, another person suggested Lupin (PoA Am. version pg 375, "...You should have realized, if Voldemort didn't kill you, we would."), Malfoy (of course), being a girl part of me wants it to be Narcissa, whom we know so little about. >>Also, in the logical vein, the Grinder is probably someone from the original Order who is reprising his/her role as mole / Secret Mastermind. DD fits this. Also, DD is the only one LV ever feared. Did Voldy fear him so much because DD was his master? << Another good point. DD is the only one LV feared, and is far older than everyone else. The longer someone lives with power, the more they like it. JKR says DD is 150, but the time-line won't work if Flamel is 665(+?--is he dead by the end of book one?), I'm sorry, this topic must have already been discussed, but I think DD is over 500, and DD's chessboard is several hundred times bigger than LV's. DD is so good, he seems too good to be true, which means he probably is. WS isn't kidding when he said fair is foul and foul is fair. He also calls Riddle, "Lord Voldemort" (CoS Am. vers. pg.329 and on), and as Harry pointed out to Snape in book 5 only DE's call him "Lord Voldemort." Or maybe book 2 was a slip up, b/c I can't find DD saying it again in any subsequant books. But then, if DD is above Riddle, he wouldn't call him his Lord, would he? ~Clef --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 03:45:02 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 03:45:02 -0000 Subject: I *love* tragic endings ! (Was : Re: What if Harry dies?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85513 Iris wrote: > Harry Dead or alive at the end of the story? > On one hand, I would try to accept it if he died, though I would be > sad .He makes me cry when he's in a hard situation, for example at > the end of OotP; I don't think I will laugh if he doesn't survive. > In order to have "a well prepared mind" concerning his potential > death, I use to think that if Harry died, he would join some other > characters that I love (Hamlet, Don Juan, Don Quijote, Frodo ), and > he would share with them the respect we tend to owe to dead heroes. > I would keep on reading the series, just the same way I keep on > reading Shakespeare, Tirso de Molina or Moli?re's plays, Cervantes > and Tolkien's novels: because they are much more than combinations > of stories and characters. There's also the way the artists wrote > them, there's what we could call "the work of art miracle", that > repeats indefinitely. Thanks to this "miracle", we know that we can > leave Frodo, Don Juan, Don Quijote or Hamlet go, just because we > also know that we'll meet them again. True heroes never vanish > completely; we can bring them back every time we need them. We know > we can shut the books; we can open them another time and the magic > of verb will go on. It will be the same with Harry, who already > belongs to legend. > > On the other hand, I would be glad if I could shut the book > saying "He did it, he survived". > However, I'm not sure this ending would be as satisfying to him as > we could imagine. > First, as Joseph Campbell wrote, it's difficult to a hero to find > his own place in the world he saved. Actually, he is not in the same > world anymore, because the initiation he went through put him in > another dimension. When Harry defeats Voldemort, he will be > definitely different from his friends and from the other wizards. > How will he live among people who will treat him like a phenomenon? > Who will always demand perfection from him? His closest friends (if > they survive ) will certainly treat him "normally", but the others > won't. He will have very few rights ( right to weakness, to > mistake ) and a lot of duties. Any example? Look at what happens in > the first book when he makes Gryffindor loose points: his mates from > the Quidditch Team don' call him by his name anymore. He's only "the > seeker", just as if he didn't deserve the name "Harry Potter" > anymore. He doesn't fit with the representation the others had of > him, he is not as he must be, and he has to cope with their grief. > The Wizarding World doesn't want Harry to betray his own legend > while he's only a child. It will be worse when he manages to defeat > completely Voldemort. He will have to be a model, or a symbol; he > will not be allowed to be "just Harry". That's for the first option. > > And there's another option that makes me wonder whether he will be > happy in the world he will have saved: it's a world with a very > short memory. Look at what happens to Dumbledore: he's not as > popular as he should be. He defeated Grindelwald. He's "the only one > Voldemort ever feared". Do wizards treat him well for all that? Not > precisely. Some say he's a nutter, some say he's too old, or think > he would be able to take the power. They don't trust him; it appears > clearly in the fifth book. At the end of OotP, of course, he's given > back his credit, but only because the others fear Voldemort. Now > they want him to save the day and are ready to treat him > obsequiously. I bet that they will do the same with Harry after > Voldemort's defeat. He will only have the right to help them if they > need him, and shut up the rest of the time. > I probably haven't snipped enough of this post since I really want to deal only with the possible parallel between Harry and Frodo. To begin with, Frodo doesn't die: He leaves Middle Earth for the Uttermost West (where he will not become immortal like the Elves, but will at least be healed in body and spirit and have time to live the remaining years of his natural lifespan, another fifty or so at lest given the lifespans of hobbits) in a peaceful, unchanging land very different from Middle Earth. You're right that he saves Middle Earth, particularly his beloved Shire, but can no longer find happiness in it. But there's a huge difference here. The Middle Earth Frodo can no longer live in is in some sense diminished. The Elves (except the Silvan Elves of Greenwood the Great, formerly Mirkwood) are gone; the time of Men has come. It's our world, the RW, in the making. Though the Hobbits and Dwarves are still there, they, too, will fade away (Durin the Seventh. . . and Last). But Harry's world, which is already in some respects our modern Muggle world with a "secondary world" (Tolkien's term), the WW, within it. Since JKR's story takes place in the 1990s--Harry's present and future but our past--we *know* that VW2 can't have much impact on the Muggle world. He isn't Sauron in the distant (and imaginary) past, who poses an almost incomprehensible threat and whose defeat ironically brings change almost as great as his victory would have. The changes Voldemort brought to the WW in VW1 will happen again--people will die or disappear or be corrupted or be driven insane by Cruciatus curses, but the WW will survive just as it did after the defeat of Grindelwald--probably more or less intact and more or less as it has always done. There may even be improvements and modernizations that Hermione will approve of, such as freedom for House Elves or tolerance for werewolves. None of these things will directly affect Harry. Think about what Harry's world has been up till now. His parents killed when he was fifteen months old, ten years of living in the cupboard under the stairs. Hogwarts was his refuge for his first few years, but there were still the miserable summers with the Dursleys and the death of Sirius and too many other problems to mention. now he has a new burden that he can't share with his friends, the secret of the prophecy. In other words, Harry's world is about as different as possible from Frodo's Shire, and so is his relationship to it. The young Frodo was happy and carefree in a seemingly perfect rural world of trees and hills and little rivers (to paraphrase Bilbo). Harry has seldom been happy and never carefree in his world of Muggle suburbia and boarding school and the Forbidden Forest. Harry, like any adolescent, has no choice but to leave school behind and enter the adult world. No tragedy there, just inescapable mundane fact. We know that Hogwarts won't be destroyed because one of Harry's friends (probably Neville) will become a teacher there, but even if it were destroyed it wouldn't affect Harry directly because he has to leave anyway. It's not a question of being unable to live in the world he saved. He can't live in Hogwarts, anyway, and the world he saves can only be a better place to live after he saves it (with the help of his friends). I realize that lives will be lost and many people will be in mourning, but that happens in any war. The enemy, whoever he is, cannot be defeated without loss and destruction but the world that emerges after the battle can find joy and beauty again. The WW can learn from its mistakes and try again. Think of England after World War II. Think of Fawkes the Phoenix dying and rising from his ashes. The price of peace is sacrifice, but the sacrifice need not be Harry. You say that the WW has a short memory and I agree, but I think for Harry, that will be a good thing. Why would he want to return to the miserable world of his childhood? Why not live happily in the better one he's helped to bring about? Why not celebrate the release from his burden and share the short-lived glory with the other heroes (he won't be the only one) and when the fickle WW forgets him, why not be "Just Harry"? Harry isn't Frodo and JKR isn't Joseph Campbell. There's no reason for Harry not to find a place in the world he saved. Carol From Zarleycat at aol.com Thu Nov 20 03:49:58 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 03:49:58 -0000 Subject: Stellar Brothers In-Reply-To: <000001c3aef8$389c5dc0$5393aec7@Einstein> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85514 > >From: canismajorette > > >Indeed these two brothers are named for prominent stars located in a > >relatively compact region of the celestial sphere.? Sirius is of > >course Alpha Canis Major, the brightest star in the constellation of > >the Greater Dog.? Regulus is Alpha Leo, the brightest star in the > >constellation Leo.? Canis Major (Latin for the Greater Dog) and Leo > >(Latin for Lion) > > Iggy here: > > This info makes it all the more significant that Sirius's chosen > Anumagus form was a large, midnight black dog... doesn't it? *grin* Now me: Except that the witch/wizard does not choose her/his Animagus form. Sirius becoming a big, black dog just coincidently fits into this discussion. ;-). He could just as well have turned into a black cocker spaniel... Iggy: > One would also be inclined to wonder if Regulus was an Animagus as well, > and whether his alternate form was a lion. Me: Regulus strikes me as someone who eagerly followed the path that was set out for him by the people who had the most influence over him at the time. Early in his life that would have been his purity crazed parents. Later on, once he became a DE recruit, he could have been influenced by people such as Lucius Malfoy or his lieutenants. I think that if Regulus had been an Animagus, he would have been a sheep. A black sheep, perhaps, but a sheep nonetheless. Marianne From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 04:01:12 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 04:01:12 -0000 Subject: Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85515 Dogberry wrote: > I agree with Berit, Neville will not torture Bellatrix, he won't > sink to her level. > > I think the problem with his Gran is that she can't let go to what > happened to her son. She is trying to make Neville into Frank and > not seeing Neville as his own person. I think the person to be wary > of is Great Uncle Algie. I don't trust him; after all, he dropped an > eight year old out of a second story window and giving him a very > rare plant no t mention Trevor something is going on there. > > I see Neville's role in the future books as the unsung hero, he will > be there for people when they need him but will no be the leader. I > would like to see Neville becomes a teacher or a healer. I don't > want him to become an auror, it will feel like he is living up to > his Gran's and indeed the rest of his family exceptions rather then > his own. I like your idea about Neville's gran trying to make him into Frank by giving him Frank's wand. That makes a lot more sense than having her try to make him into a squib, especially since having (essentially) lost her son and daughter-in-law to Voldemort, she has every reason to oppose him and none to be on his side. If anyone is keeping them from recovering their senses, it almost certainly isn't gran. But Great Uncle Algie (whom I take to be Gran's brother) doesn't strike me as evil--more than a bit eccentric, but he would know that a wizard child wouldn't be killed by dropping him out a window. (He probably doesn't have much experience with Muggeles. Imagine if Aunt Marge had done that to Dudley. . . .) I think that both the Mimbulus mimbletonia and Trevor will play some sort of role in Book 6 or 7, but for good, I hope. And heaven forfend if Trevor turns out to be another animagus. Here, Crookshanks. Sniff him, please, so we'll know he's a real toad. . . . Carol From erikal at magma.ca Thu Nov 20 05:45:12 2003 From: erikal at magma.ca (Erika L.) Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:45:12 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Defending Ron WAS Re: Hermione Message-ID: <02cd01c3af29$77ef5780$a58b1a40@oemcomputer> No: HPFGUIDX 85516 Mandy wrote: >Hermione is not >afraid to take on her firends and >challenge them when it's important, >encourage them when they really need it >and says no when they are >wrong. Hermione is a far better friend >than Ron could ever be to >Harry, who is nothing more than a >drinking buddy who agrees with >everything Harry wants and does. Devin replied: >I like Hermione, too. But I feel >compelled to shade Ron from the >sycophantic (I would even say boorish) >light you paint him in. now me-- Erika: I think a lot of the flak Ron gets regarding his friendship with Harry stems the argument in GoF. Harry really needed Ron's support and Ron flaked out on him for about a hundred pages. True, in the face of a thousand plus pages of canon, that's not all that much. However, the fact remains that Ron, for a time anyway, put his own concerns and his petty jealousies before his friendship with Harry. He wasn't a good friend when he did that. Is it understandable for a fourteen year old boy to act so? Probably. But it invites comparison with Hermione who seems to have set herself the task of keeping Harry in one piece-- whether he likes it or not. Devon: >Hermione >gives better advice about girls, of >course, but it's often Ron who >understands when it's pointless to >pester Harry about something and >tells Hermione to let it go (which, to >her credit, she sometimes does >take as the proper advice and which >indicates that Hermione herself >believes Ron can be right about how to >treat Harry). Erika: I'll grant you that Ron understands some things better, Quidditch, for example, or even Harry's reluctance about Cho, but Hermione's ability to "pester" Harry is sometimes very important to his well-being. Sometimes it's good to have a friend who won't back down no matter the consequences. I heartily agree with Laura's comments. Laura: >On the other hand, she's also brave >enough to stand up for what she >believes is right, no matter what the >consequences (e.g. Trelawney, >Umbridge, Harry's Firebolt). As a >great man once said, "It takes a >great deal of courage to stand up to >our enemies, but just as much to >stand up to our friends." She's a >*good* friend, the kind that tells >you what you *need* to hear, rather >than what you *want* to hear. Erika: The infamous Firebolt argument is indeed a telling example. Hermione's willing to risk her friendship with Harry in order to try to protect him. She did what she felt was necessary even though she ended up quite miserable as a result. Thus, even a the age of thirteen she's willing to put what's best for Harry before what's best for her. The same is true in GoF and OoP in smaller ways. She's willing to set aside her own studies in order to help Harry prepare for the third task (GoF 528 UK), and, again, in OoP believes that the DA is more important than schoolwork (OoP 291 UK). This represents a fair bit of progress on Hermione's part (Remember book one? "killed -- or worse expelled" (PS 120))-- progress she's made in large part because of her friendship with Harry. And Hermione continues being the best friend she can be whether her efforts are appreciated or not. Harry is quite aware of Ron's importance in his life, but he rarely seems conscious of how much he relies on Hermione. He's never been without her aid; even in CoS when she is petrified, the note he finds crumpled in her hand gives him the information he needs to solve the puzzle. The time turner in PoA, Accio in GoF, the interview with Rita Skeeter in OoP- Hermione's help is key to Harry's success. Yes, Ron's friendship is important. He's there when it comes down to it, at the Shrieking Shack or the MoM, and he provides moral support for Harry. But Hermione's tendency to "pester" Harry is also rather important and he might be better off if he listened to her pestering once in a while. For example, she thought it was a bad idea for Sirius to accompany Harry to the train station, and it was as the Malfoys ended up recognising him. Also, at the end of OoP she told Harry that the vision about Sirius at the MoM had to be a trap, and look how that turned out... Just my two knuts Erika (Wolfraven) [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 05:15:58 2003 From: lily_paige_delaney at yahoo.com (lily_paige_delaney) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 05:15:58 -0000 Subject: Dirty on Dumbledore & who will Harry confide in? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85517 Does anyone else think that it was strange that Dumbledore just lets Harry leave his office thinking his only fate is to be murdered or be the murderer? He doesn't even offer any help! What kind of way is that to treat someone? Especially someone you profess to love? The only explanation I can guess for this is that he wants Harry to come to terms with the reality of the situation and wants him to ASK for help rather than have it handed to him on a plate. Remember that help is always given to those at Hogwarts who ask for it (CoS). Up until now Harry's destiny has been influenced by outside events which he has reacted to. I hope that in book 6 we will see him on the offensive for a change, shaping his own destiny and working out a plan of action against Voldemort. Harry needs to find out as much about Voldemort as he can. I believe that knowledge can be Harry's power and the best person to tell him is Dumbledore - but will Harry be too proud to ask? The other people I think can provide invaluable information are Ginny (what exactly happened in the CoS and what does she know about Tom Riddle from the diary?) and Snape (although I can't see any possibility of this happening!). It will be interesting to see if and when Harry tells Ron and Hermoine about the prophecy. In his present state of mind its hard to imagine he would for a while and maybe not until he was forced. Who might he tell? I see Ginny and/or Luna as the likely candidates. Ginny has proven herself to be quite perceptive to Harry's emotions and she may pick up that something more than Sirius' death is troubling him - after all, she knows a lot about carrying around a dark secret. He's unburdened himself to her once already and may do so again if prompted. The reason I think he might confide in Luna is that she is someone to whom he does not have an emotional investment but someone with whom he has made a connection and who has unusual sources of information outside Hogwarts which could help him. Gunning for a more pro-active Harry! LPD From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 20 05:28:19 2003 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 05:28:19 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85518 "Berit Jakobsen" asked: >Is it just me, or are there more HP readers out there who doesn't >think the DADA position is jinxed? My impression from reading the >books is that it's just a rumour created by students with too much >imagination... I think it's probably a rumor, but on the other hand we all thought Snape's wanting the DADA post was just a rumor too, because we only heard it from students ... Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ >From the hottest toys to tips on keeping fit this winter, youll find a range of helpful holiday info here. http://special.msn.com/network/happyholidays.armx From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 20 05:38:26 2003 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 05:38:26 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85519 "zihav" electrified me by saying: >JKR also said that Snape will fall in love at some point. Where? When? Inquiring minds want to know. >What if he >all ready is and it's Narcissa. Narcissa's a married woman. I will be very surprised if JKR has such a relationship in her book (although Diana Wynne Jones did so in "The Crown of Dalemark," but not with a character as high-profile as Snape). What about Tonks? She'd make him wash his hair and change his underwear ... in fact, I foresee that if Snape actually does get a girlfriend, we'll be able to tell by the improvement in his hygiene. Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ Share holiday photos without swamping your Inbox. Get MSN Extra Storage now! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 05:53:29 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 05:53:29 -0000 Subject: Mister Figg....? In-Reply-To: <001901c3ae88$a38ae540$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85520 > > Carol: > > > > Since you snipped a large part of my post, you may have misread the > > part you quoted, which is only a preliminary suggestion, not the main > > argument. You say that the maiden name is irrelevant; I say that > > either the maiden name is Figg or it's omitted. Either way, we agree > > that Figg is her married name if indeed she was married. (If she > > wasn't married, then Figg *is* her maiden name.) In the snipped > > portion of the post I arrive at the conclusion that she did, indeed, > > marry and that her husband was a muggle. My intention was to try to > > answer the poster who asked if we knew Mrs. Figg's maiden name. It > > appears that we don't, and neither does the MoM. If they did, they > > might have kept better track of her. Motto: If you're a female squib > > and don't want to disappear from the WW, marry a wizard. ;-) > > > > K > > Well of course she omitted it. She was stating her legal name for the > record, her legal name wouldn't include her maiden name. Adding that her > maiden name was whatever would probably have caused the judges to irritable > suggest she stick to answering the questions she was asked (well if they're > anything like muggle judges who don't like people wandering off the point). > Why would anyone expect her to add it? Saying she omitted it, implies that > it was information that was part of the answer but she didn't give it. So no > we don't know her maiden name but she was definitely married. *shrugs* She's > never struck me as likely to become an important character so I don't think > it's ever likely to come up - of course I could be totally wrong and her > name could turn out to have been Riddle or something and she'll have a vital > role in the final battle. > > K Kathryn, I wasn't trying to argue with you. I was trying to show you that we agree on several points, which I thought you might not have realized because of the particular portion of my post that you quoted. Also I'm not the person who originally raised the question if Nrs. Figg's maiden name. I was just trying to explore the topic to see where it led. That said, I do think (now) that Mrs. Figg's married name is the reason the MoM didn't know who she was. A female squib who marries a muggle disappears from their knowledge rather quickly, a point that could be important with regard to little Mr. Evans, whom the WW in general doesn't seem to know about--yet. Not to pick nits or anything, but in some circumstances, your maiden name is part of your full name, at least in America. The IRS will ask for it on your tax return for seven years and you're required to include it on your master's thesis or doctoral dissertation. I have no idea what the situation is in England, much less in the WW, where neither income tax nor graduate school even exists. Anyway, I'm sorry if you thought I was being rude for mentioning that you snipped away my main point. That certainly wasn't my intention. Cheers, Carol From lhuntley at fandm.edu Thu Nov 20 05:56:48 2003 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 00:56:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5411BC8A-1B1E-11D8-9F04-000A95E29F3E@fandm.edu> No: HPFGUIDX 85521 zihav: >> JKR also said that Snape will fall in love at some point. Janet Anderson: > Where? When? Inquiring minds want to know. I am also interested in seeing this quote from myself. zihav: >> What if he >> all ready is and it's Narcissa. Janet Anderson: > Narcissa's a married woman. I will be very surprised if JKR has such a > relationship in her book (although Diana Wynne Jones did so in "The > Crown of > Dalemark," but not with a character as high-profile as Snape). Well, it could be *unrequited* love, although I'm a tentative supporter of LOLLIPOPS, myself. However, I disagree strongly that JKR wouldn't put "such a relationship" in the books. Oh, I don't think she'd hit us over the head with something like "Narcissa Malfoy is cheating on Lucius with Severus Snape! That means they're having SEX!" But I *do* think she might have something subtler, such as "Narcissa Malfoy was forced by societal/familial/economic pressure to marry Lucius, but the love that she and Snape share is still strong." I'm not saying that I think JKR would endorse extramarital affairs, just that she's the type of author that would go ahead and put them in her book if she wanted to. Janet Anderson: > What about Tonks? She'd make him wash his hair and change his > underwear ... > in fact, I foresee that if Snape actually does get a girlfriend, we'll > be > able to tell by the improvement in his hygiene. > It's that always the way? Laura From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 07:09:08 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:09:08 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85522 "Steve" wrote: > > > I suspect that once Harry is gone from the school, the 'magnet' > that > > has been drawing bad luck to the job will be gone too. However, I > must > > amend that by pointing out that with the exception of Lupin, all > the > > DADA teachers were either incompetent or their integrity was > seriously > > compromised. Either way, they were corrupted in ways that almost > > guaranteed their doom. > > > > Jen R wrote: You know, I think even Lupin was undone in the end by his own > weakness--cowardice, as he himself says in POA . He didn't want to > risk Dumbledore's trust by telling him about the illegal animagi and > the secret tunnels; those omissions led to the finale in the > Shrieking Shack and ultimately, Lupin's fate. I don't see it as > corruption so much as a character flaw, though. (And I'm still not > convinved Quirrell's conversion was completely his doing--LV seems > to be very *convincing* when needed....). But you get no argument > from me on Crouch!Moody, Lockhart and Umbridge being deeply corrupt > to begin with. Quirrell was also undone by his own weakness. Voldemort chose him as a servant because he was "young, foolish, and gullible" (GoF--I don't have the page number handy but I can find it if anyone wants it)--and because he was a teacher at Hogwarts. (Either he had just been hired or the jinx wasn't in effect yet. I think the former, since Snape had applied for about the eleventh time and had not received the position.) When Quirrell failed to obtain the sorceror's stone from the vault at Gringott's, Voldemort possessed him. At that point, it's difficult to determine just how much of his own will was left to him. It must have been like being under an Imperius curse only worse because he could never escape the mind that had violated and occupied his own head. He knew what had happened to him and even tried (feebly) to argue with Voldemort. But once he had drunk the unicorn blood (I can't pinpoint when that occurred, but it was some time before the detention in the Forbidden Forest), he became irreversibly corrupted, tainted, doomed, and evil. The Quirrell we see in the scene with the mirror of Erised is stronger and more intelligent than the timid, stammering Quirrell of the earlier scenes, but it's hard to tell how much of the timidity is an act. I think he pretended to faint when he ran into the dining hall to inform everyone of the troll in the dungeon. He certainly wasn't afraid of the troll, which he had brought in himself (controlling trolls was his one qualification for the DADA post, I suppose), but he may really have been so terrified by the prospect of failure that he really did faint. I think he was also genuinely afraid of Snape and undoubtedly terrified of Voldemort. The stammering could stem from fear but was probably an act. So why is he so different at the end of the book? What happened, exactly? Has he simply dropped all his pretenses or is he really stronger than the foolish young man he was when Voldemort first started using him? Did he paradoxically become more of a dark wizard in his own right because of the unicorn blood? Did Voldemort's growing strength make him stronger, too? Was he still Voldemort's puppet despite the change in his personality or was he intending to give him the stone of his own free will, expecting to be rewarded for his loyalty? (I would ask how he could have given him the stone and what would have happened then, but that doesn't really relate to the question at hand.) So back to the original question. Was he weak or was he evil? Weak to begin with, certainly, and at the end barely able to distinguish between his own will and Voldemort's, yet still able to take pleasure in his own cleverness. He has no qualms about killing Harry, which shows that he has indded become evil. What was left of his innocence is gone along with his timidity. It must have been the conscious decision to kill the unicorn and the act of defiling himself by drinking its blood that changed him. At that moment he ceased to be a victim and became a villain. One thing's certain. Jinx or no jinx, he wouldn't have been the DADA teacher the following year! Carol, who hopes that this makes sense because I'm discovering what I think as I type rather than presenting a fully developed, reasoned argument From oppen at mycns.net Thu Nov 20 07:21:08 2003 From: oppen at mycns.net (Eric Oppen) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 01:21:08 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dirty on Dumbledore & who will Harry confide in? References: Message-ID: <04b001c3af36$df3fc8e0$52570043@hppav> No: HPFGUIDX 85523 > Does anyone else think that it was strange that Dumbledore just lets > Harry leave his office thinking his only fate is to be murdered or be > the murderer? He doesn't even offer any help! What kind of way is > that to treat someone? Especially someone you profess to love? The thing is, I can't see why Harry, or anybody else, thinks that for Harry to kill Voldemort would constitute murder. Given V's track record of murder attempts on Harry, even if Harry snuck up behind him and AK'd him to a crackly crunch, I doubt that any court in the Muggle world (not to mention the WW) would even consider charging Harry. As long as he lives, or exists, Voldemort is a standing danger to everybody, Wizard or Muggle. Killing him would be more like an execution than anything else---or putting down a mad dog. He's killed and killed and killed again, without (in most cases) any shred of provocation. He is a known threat to everybody, particularly those who oppose him (which includes most of Harry's pureblood wizard friends) and Muggle-born witches and wizards (most of Harry's other friends, including especially one Hermione Granger); he's apparently involved in some sort of plot to take over Britain (doesn't this count as High Treason?) or at least its wizarding component; he's "broken every human law; he'd break the law of gravity," to borrow from TS Eliot. Frankly, in Harry's situation, even at his age, I'd have no more considered killing V-mort to be murder than I would be likely to flap my arms and fly. Harry may think that it's murder. Maybe this makes him a nicer person than I am. That's perfectly possible---almost anybody this side of Lord V. is a nicer person than I am. Or it may make him the biggest prat in the Wizard World. I wonder what Tonks, or Mad-Eye Moody, or some adult he respects and trusts (short list, that) would say about this situation? I somehow "hae me doots" that any Auror would consider it murder to kill Lord "Thingy," and about the only other WW adults he knows are his teachers...and the senior Weasleys. It might be a very interesting scene in the next book, when Harry has to talk to _someone,_ and ends up confiding in the closest thing he has to a real mother: Molly Weasley. I think Molly might be just the person to get his head on straight. "You want to get Voldemort? I'll tell you how to get Voldemort! Whatever he does, you do it back to him twice as bad! He casts 'Crucio,' you cast 'Avada Kedavra!' He puts one of your friends into St. Mungo's---you put one of his Death Eaters _in the ground!_ That's the Hogwarts way---and that's how you're going to get Voldemort!" --a .sig file I liked From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 07:48:10 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:48:10 -0000 Subject: The children's future careers- Potions vs Herbology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85524 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatlit2003" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" > wrote: > > ... it will be Neville. But, just curious, why potions? Do you > think Snape will die, or get the DADA job, or what? > > Personally, I think Neville teaching DADA or Herbology is more > > likely. > > > > Erin > > I think that Neville would be better at Potions if he had a less > intimidating teacher. Harry noticed that Neville looked calmer and > happier during the Potions O.W.L. where Snape wasn't present. Plus, > I would like to see Snape as the DADA teacher. > > greatlit2003 bboy_mn: My theory is that Mdm. Sprout will take over Potions, Snape will cover DADA, and after Voldemort is all sorted out, Neville will take over Herbology. This is based in my believe that Potion is just applied Herbology. The books imply two text books for potions, but the only one that is ever reference in potions class or in relation to potions class is 'One Thousand Herbs and Fungi'. So, I think Neville could be reasonably good at potions if given a chance, because he knows and understands most of the ingredients. Again, while not absolute, in general, Potions is just applied Herbology. Perdiction for Harry's future- This is old new, I've predicted this before, but he I like to hear myself talk, so I'm going to tell you again ;). I predict that Harry much like his father will be sufficiently wealth that he doesn't really need a regular payed job. The fortune he currently has can't last forever, so he does need a source of some income. What is that source? ...Weasley Wizarding Wheezes. I think at some point Fred and George will try to pay Harry back the G1,000 (Tri_Wiz prize $), but Harry will refuse. So, unknown to Harry, Fred and George will give Harry a formal share of their business. I have speculated 50% for Harry, since it's all based on his money, but that might be a little too much. But I think 25% to 33% is well within reason. So, Fred and George keep funneling Harry's share of the money back into the business, in a sense compounding Harry's share. Near the end of the books Harry will find out, and Fred and George will refuse to have it any other way. Consequently, Harry will have a lifetime income for the immensely successful Weasley business. So, that's how he gets money, but what does he do? I predict by the end of that last book, Harry will be so physically, emotionally, and psychologially wounded, that he will want nothing more that to be left alone to live out his life in quiet obscurity. So, he will live off Weasley income, take a minor role in the business, keep a low profile, and choose various projects of interest as they suit him. One interest may be helping orphaned, neglected, and abused kids in the wizard world. His attempt to make sure that no other kid ever has to live the battered and scarred life the Harry has lived. Just a thought. bboy_mn From silmariel at telefonica.net Thu Nov 20 09:28:36 2003 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:28:36 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Dirty on Dumbledore & who will Harry confide in? In-Reply-To: <04b001c3af36$df3fc8e0$52570043@hppav> References: <04b001c3af36$df3fc8e0$52570043@hppav> Message-ID: <200311201028.36455.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85525 Eric Oppen: >The thing is, I can't see why Harry, or anybody else, thinks that for Harry to kill Voldemort would constitute murder. I suposse (in this particular case) if it is not in self-defense, it is considered as an execution, so murder. It depends on if you consider executions murders or not, but as I do, I understand the listies that use that word. I've also seen expressed by listies that merely knowing they had been the cause for a death would affect them deeply, so it is another motive to resource to the word murder as a means of rejecting the idea of being forced to kill because of a prophecy. when Harry has to talk to _someone,_ and ends up confiding in the closest thing he has to a real mother: Molly Weasley. I think Molly might be just the person to get his head on straight. > "You want to get Voldemort? I'll tell you how to get Voldemort! > Whatever he does, you do it back to him twice as bad! He casts > 'Crucio,' you cast 'Avada Kedavra!' He puts one of your friends > into St. Mungo's---you put one of his Death Eaters _in the > ground!_ That's the Hogwarts way---and that's how you're going > to get Voldemort!" --a .sig file I liked Evil!Molly? It reminds me of The Retun of the Jedi, with the Emperor telling Luke to kill Dartie and join his dark side. Silmariel From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 20 08:21:12 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 08:21:12 -0000 Subject: The children's future careers- Potions vs Herbology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85526 << wrote: ...I think Neville could be reasonably good at potions...I like to hear myself talk, so I'm going to tell you again: ...I predict that Harry much like his father will be sufficiently wealthy that he doesn't really need a regular job. The fortune he currently has can't last forever, so he does need a source of some income...Weasley Wizarding Wheezes...Fred and George keep funneling Harry's share of the money back into the business, in a sense compounding Harry's share. ...I predict by the end of that last book, Harry will be so physically, emotionally, and psychologially wounded, that he will want nothing more that to be left alone to live out his life in quiet obscurity...>>> The Sergeant Majorette says Roger that, although I don't see any reason why Harry's money can't last forever. You have to assume that the Potter fortune is invested some kind of way, and that nobody ever loses money under the goblins. I always thought that Neville would be the one to teach at Hogwarts, but Potions? Wouldn't that put Snape's pantyhose in a twist even if he *did* get the DADA post! I can't see Harry living happily ever after, but it'll break my heart if he dies, so your solution works for me. Your Harry reminds me of the people one sometimes encounters working dull and/or menial jobs with a wry twinkle in their eyes; you always wonder what's going on in their heads. Or like the late Seymour Cray, the supercomputer guy, who told interviewers that he solved tricky technical problems by leaving the back door open for the elves... --JDR From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 08:25:59 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 08:25:59 -0000 Subject: Why do you like Harry Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85527 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gmail11220" wrote: > ....edited... Why do you like the Harry Potter Books? > > I have read all the books myself but I am interested in what other > people think. This would greatly help my project. Thank you. > > gmail11220 Well, first and formost, she tells a very captivating story. As well as captivating, it is enchanting, enthralling, enticing, exciting, endearing, charming, inspiring, ... I could go on and on. JKR, as a writer, has a sense of irony to her. Not in her writing style but in her ...existance. (For lack of any better way to say it.) On one hand, she writes in an extremely compact style. You will find many two, three, and four word sentences in the books. She just says things without wasting any words. The irony is that with hardly any words at all, she is magically able to create an incredibly vivid and believable world. Let's take Ron as an example. How well do you know Ron, to what extent is he a vivid image in your mind? I know exactly what Ron looks like; how he combs his hair, quirky little facial expressions he makes, quirky little mannerisms, the sound of his voice, I know him far beyond and much more intimately than is contained in the exact text of the book. Let's look at our first description of Ron; the only description in book one. - Quote - SS/PS Am Pb pg 116 - He was tall, thin, and gangling, with freckles, big hands and feet, and a long nose. - end quote - And of course, we are told he has red hair. How can it be that I feel I know Ron in such intimate detail when what is quoted above is all I have to go on? This is JKR's magic. Her style is extremely compact but at the same time she gives you just enough to ignite your imagination. And in th process, she has implant much much more of the wizard world in my imagination than she has actually written in the pages of the book. If you go back and look at a favorite scene in any of the books, and actually look at how much story is contained in so very very few pages you will be surprised. Great leaps of story are told with such amazing efficiency, yet ironically, in the most unbelievably vivid and detailed way. Because of this efficient and vivid style, even the slowest unexciting parts of the book don't last very long before you are swept off on some adventure or caught up in some hi-jinx. So, I guess, in the fewest words, I like these books because they ignite my imagination. Just a thought. bboy_mn From ffionmiles at hotmail.com Thu Nov 20 09:28:42 2003 From: ffionmiles at hotmail.com (ffimiles) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:28:42 -0000 Subject: Defending Ron WAS Re: Hermione In-Reply-To: <02cd01c3af29$77ef5780$a58b1a40@oemcomputer> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85528 > Erika: > The infamous Firebolt argument is indeed a telling example. Hermione's willing to risk her friendship with Harry in order to try to protect him. She did what she felt was necessary even though she ended up quite miserable as a result. Thus, even a the age of thirteen she's willing to put what's best for Harry before what's best for her. The same is true in GoF and OoP in smaller ways. She's willing to set aside her own studies in order to help Harry prepare for the third task (GoF 528 UK), and, again, in OoP believes that the DA is more important than schoolwork (OoP 291 UK). This represents a fair bit of progress on Hermione's part (Remember book one? "killed -- or worse expelled" (PS 120))-- progress she's made in large part because of her friendship with Harry. > > And Hermione continues being the best friend she can be whether her efforts are appreciated or not. Harry is quite aware of Ron's importance in his life, but he rarely seems conscious of how much he relies on Hermione. He's never been without her aid; even in CoS when she is petrified, the note he finds crumpled in her hand gives him the information he needs to solve the puzzle. The time turner in PoA, Accio in GoF, the interview with Rita Skeeter in OoP- Hermione's help is key to Harry's success. > > Yes, Ron's friendship is important. He's there when it comes down to it, at the Shrieking Shack or the MoM, and he provides moral support for Harry. But Hermione's tendency to "pester" Harry is also rather important and he might be better off if he listened to her pestering once in a while. For example, she thought it was a bad idea for Sirius to accompany Harry to the train station, and it was as the Malfoys ended up recognising him. Also, at the end of OoP she told Harry that the vision about Sirius at the MoM had to be a trap, and look how that turned out... > > Just my two knuts > > Erika (Wolfraven) I agree that hermione si teh one who tells Harry to stop being so moody with her and Ron, when they're doing their best to support him. Also, Ron doesn't know how to handle Harry when they overhear people's suspicions about Harry's state of mind after experiencing the snake's attack on Mr Weasley - everyone just freezes and waits for Hermione to arrive to talk to Harry straight and calm him down. She is definately the stronger, more practical friend who can more accurately guess how Harry's feeling, and gives him valuable advice and information he doesn't get from anyone else. Howevr, we need all kinds of friends - and given the stresses Harry faces, having a friend who'll talk sport and have a laugh with you is, in many ways, equally as important, if only for Harry's own sanity. Also, after repeatedly finding Harry colapsed in agony due to his connection with LV, I think ron's coming to appreciate what Harry goes through, though I still think Ron's the weak link in terms of possible imperius curses/temptation. but, in the end, it comes down to the fact that I like him as a character faults and all. Ffi From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com Thu Nov 20 10:20:43 2003 From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:20:43 -0000 Subject: To clarify. (Snape, sexy?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85529 > > Admin note: Please make sure that any replies on this thread are primarily canonical and discussion-based. If you simply want to agree or disagree with these sentiments, please contact the writer(s) off- list. > Thankyou. Kirstin, and other mods. When you make this ruling, *Please* state your name, and your reason, along with the rule for doing this. I think this will help some of you not appear as unfair as you seem when doing this. Also, to hide from us your identity is rather rude and makes me think that your motives are not sincere. Jeff From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 11:12:06 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 03:12:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Neville's role in the series (Was: Neville's Gran) Message-ID: <20031120111206.64573.qmail@web40013.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85530 20Nov03 "justcarol67" wrote: Dogberry wrote: ...the person to be wary of is Great Uncle Algie. I don't trust him; after all, he dropped an eight year old out of a second story window and giving him a very rare plant not mention Trevor something is going on there.... Paula now: Exactly, something is going on there. I've always suspected that Great Uncle Algie knows something! If there are to be any "new characters" he'll be the one. His name is always just dropped or mention is made of a trip. But what he really does, knows and why we still don't know. We all know JKR doesn't just mention characters and events for no reason. IMHO, we are yet to hear Algie's whole story; and learn the extent of his involvement. Just look at how the casual mention of Sirius in the early books developed. ~Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 20 10:33:08 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:33:08 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85531 The Sergeant Majorette: >Am I the only person that *doesn't* find that age gap odd? Most > of the nuclear units in my extended family are configured like that>> > Geoff: What has occurred to me, as a Brit, is that I can immediately think of at least two well-known families with a gap. In the Royal Family, there is a 10 year gap between Princess Anne (1950) and Prince Andrew (1960) and, in the Blair family, there is a gap of maybe 7-8 years between the third child (A girl IIRC) and Leo. So if Tony can do it, why can't Molly and Arthur? Geoff From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 20 10:27:07 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:27:07 -0000 Subject: Challenging Lexicon timeline (was Ron's dead brother) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85532 > > I found it and yes, he does say seven years. Okay, I get that, but > > why is it automatically assumed that Charlie won the cup the last > > year he was at school? After all, Wood describes Harry as better > > than Charlie, and it still takes three years for their team to win > > the cup. Also, if Charlie left before Wood even got there, how > would > > Wood be able to compare their flying styles? > > Geoff: We had a long thread on this or a very similar matter a couple of months ago, which might help with the present discuaaion. It's "Charlie Weasley's Age" and starts at message 76208. Geoff From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 20 10:52:50 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:52:50 -0000 Subject: Why do you like Harry Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85533 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gmail11220" wrote: > I am a senior at Kenyon College and I am doing a research paper for my > senior project on the role of fantasy and magic in our society. I am > sure this question has come up many, many times. I am new to this > group so I do not know what has been said. Why do you like the Harry > Potter Books? I have read all the books myself but I am interested in > what other people think. This would greatly help my project. Thank > you. Geoff: I repeat below part of a post I wrote on 10/08/03 which in part was comparing other children's and fantasy literature such as Tolkien. I have edited the comments slightly to remove some of the comparative remarks. If you want to read my full comments, it was message 76390 - or you could email me direct. For a while I allowed myself to be swayed by members of my church who said that HP was bad and taught children all the wrong things. I finally met up with Harry last November when my wife and I and a friend with whom we were staying found ourselves at a loose end and went to the cinema in Barry (near Cardiff for non-UK readers) and saw COS. Very soon after, I watched PS on Sky Box Office and was greatly impressed to the end that I bought the then four books in short order and read them. I am now going through these four for the fifth time (now entering GOF) and have read OOTP three times. (Currently seventh time at 20/11/03!!) I have gained more enjoyment out of the Potter books than any other juvenile fiction I have read. I think the way in which the books grow darker and tackle deeper problems (such as gratuitous killing in GOF) is a tribute to the writer's skill. If we are seeing it from Hary's POV, PS shows us a naive, gauche boy taking rentative steps into a strange, exciting and unsettling new world. We see him growing in confidence (sometimes unfounded!) and experience and the latest books are now tackling themes which would not be out of place in fiction written specifically for adults. Frankly, I would rather read something like the books I have mentioned or watch things like Star Trek than get involved in themes which mirror real life - family rows, affairs, terrorist violence etc. Escapist maybe, but the volume of traffic on this site shows that many of us can not only enjoy this material but let our own imaginations speculate how we might write the next book or how we would the characters to develop; we may disagree politely with each other over who is going to betray whom whether Petunia is a closet witch but it is all very stimulating stuff whether there are split infinitives or not. Geoff From seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk Thu Nov 20 10:06:55 2003 From: seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk (seraphina_snape) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 10:06:55 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85534 Kelly wrote: > I think it's plausible that Mr. and Mrs. Weasley faced the same > situation in which they were happy with the children they had, but > just ended up having more children than they planned. sera says: I don't think so. Percy may have been an accident, and maybe they wanted him to have a brother/sister closer to his age than Charlie (why they had another child). But this "other child" turned out to be twins. So if Mr. and Mrs. Weasley really intended to not have any more children, they would have stopped after the twins. After all, that's three more children than they "originally" wanted, in your theory. sera From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 20 13:00:03 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:00:03 +0000 Subject: TBAY: Crouch Redux Message-ID: <74E9DA6C-1B59-11D8-8AF9-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85535 From: B Arrowsmith Date: Thu Nov 20, 2003 12:29:33 PM Europe/London To: hpforgrownups at yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: TBAY: Crouch Redux In a dimly lit alcove of the Canon Museum, Kneasy stirred irritably. He'd sneaked in to find a nice quiet warm spot where he could sleep off his liquid lunch. And then all this chattering started. "Got no consideration, some people," he grumbled to his constant companion, "diggin' up past 'istory when some of us is tryin' to sleep." The snot-beribboned mite that was Snape!Son made no answer but drooled over Kneasy's shoes and clamped himself tighter to our hero's left leg. "Wouldn't mind, but they left out the interestin' bit," continued Kneasy. " O'course Crouch was tipped for Minister, course he wanted it, course he loved power; but I heard a whisper as that didn't suit some people. Too straight, too stiff, not 'flexible' enough." He chuckled. "So they decided to get rid of him; he was getting too good at sortin' out the DEs and some was wonderin' who'd be next. "You don't think that young Barty was found with them DEs by accident, do you? Not what I heard. I heard it was 'arranged' by 'interested parties' to bring old Crouch down. Couldn't win, you see; either he goes easy on Barty and everybody thinks it's nepotism, or he goes hard and everybody looks at him as if he's somethin' the cat dragged in. Either way he gets knocked off his pedestal. Worked too. Bound to. Folks not so keen on his methods no more. Lookin' for an excuse to get shut of him. And suddenly there ain't so many DEs in court when old Fudge gets his feet under the desk. Has to look after his friends, don't he? O'course later old Crouch realised what had happened, so he gets young Barty out o' the slammer." He shifted to a more comfortable position. "Just somethin' I heard," he muttered. It wasn't long before gentle snores rolled among the exhibits. From vicky.gwosdz at group4falck.be Thu Nov 20 13:04:34 2003 From: vicky.gwosdz at group4falck.be (Vicky Gwosdz) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:04:34 -0000 Subject: Why do you like Harry Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85536 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gmail11220" wrote: > I am a senior at Kenyon College and I am doing a research paper for my > senior project on the role of fantasy and magic in our society. I am > sure this question has come up many, many times. I am new to this > group so I do not know what has been said. Why do you like the Harry > Potter Books? I have read all the books myself but I am interested in > what other people think. This would greatly help my project. Thank > you. To me it's mostly the possibility to escape to a magical dreamworld. I often compare the stories to the early short stories by Stephen King. He used to say at the beginning of the books (and now I'm including a free translation from Dutch): "Take my hand and join me on this adventure." That's what JKR does to me with the HP books. She takes my hand for an adventure. And I'm enjoying every step of it. From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Thu Nov 20 13:39:17 2003 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:39:17 -0000 Subject: The First Thestral (filk) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85537 The First Thestral To the tune of The First Noel Dedicated to all the Filk Mavens on Santa's "nice" list HARRY: The first Thestral I ever did view Made me think for a time I Was going cuckoo No one with me could Divine where those gaunt horses stood None with me, that is Except Luna Lovegood HARRY & LUNA: Thestral, thestral, thestral, thestral Unseen by them, unto us visible NEVILLE: In Magic Creatures Care `Midst the Forbidden Trees Hagrid bought in a herd Of these unseen ponies. I held a vigil once By my grandad's death bed I gained a Sixth Horse Sense When I saw people dead. HARRY, LUNA & NEVILLE: Thestral, thestral, thestral, thestral Unseen by them, unto us visible HARRY, LUNA, NEVILLE & HAGRID If you have a need to fly To far-off places, Ask a thestral and It will make like Pegasus. Some say they are bad luck And though they may weird be We'd love to run one in the Kentucky Derby. Thestral, thestral, thestral, thestral Unseen by them but to us visible Unseen by them, unto us visible - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm From rredordead at aol.com Thu Nov 20 13:48:54 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:48:54 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85538 Tom said: > As the subject line says I think Narcissa is the ture spy for the > Order and Snape is only the go between. Snape can't possibly go back to the Death Eaters he would be killed right away. > JKR also said that Snape will fall in love at some point. What if he all ready is and it's Narcissa. This could explain why he treats > Draco so well when he knows his father is a DE. Now me: First off, as weak as it is, I love the idea, simply because I personally have been intrigued by Narcissa's character for a while and desperately want her to become a player in the saga. But we know so little about her it all becomes purely speculative. And an affaire with Snape, or even James and having Draco being Harry's half brother, is very tantalizing. I have also hoped that she is one of Lily's school friends (along with Alice Longbottom) who can't come forward to help Harry because of who her family is. But it's all delightful speculation which I can't possibly back up. :-) >Janet Anderson said: >Narcissa's a married woman. I will be very surprised if JKR has such >a relationship in her book (although Diana Wynne Jones did so >in "The Crown of >Dalemark," but not with a character as high-profile as Snape). Now me again: As for as adulterous affairs, they do happen in children's literature. Most recently in Philip Pullman's excellent saga 'His Dark Materials.' Lyra, the heroine of the story, is a product of the adulterous affair between her mother, Mrs. Coulter and her mother's lover, Lord Asrial. Asrial even goes as far as to kill Mrs. Coulter's husband in order to take his child away from him. Potent stuff for kids. I don't think JKR would be afraid to included a relationship between a married character and another. Or have a child as the offspring of and extramarital affaire. Personally I would love to find out that Draco is not really Lucius' son, if only to see Lucius go down. But again: pure speculation. ;-) Mandy From rredordead at aol.com Thu Nov 20 13:59:31 2003 From: rredordead at aol.com (ghinghapuss) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 13:59:31 -0000 Subject: Stellar Brothers In-Reply-To: <000001c3aef8$389c5dc0$5393aec7@Einstein> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85539 > Iggy here: > One would also be inclined to wonder if Regulus was an Animagus as well, and whether his alternate form was a lion. Now me: I have read somewhere here that Crookshanks could be Regulus' Animagus form, and the way he is hiding from Voldemort. The only argument I remember to support this is that Crookshanks is described as being a little lion, and he and Snuffles get on so well. Sorry I can't quote a post number. Perhaps someone else remembers who posted that idea. Mandy From silmariel at telefonica.net Thu Nov 20 14:31:46 2003 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (a_silmariel) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 14:31:46 -0000 Subject: The Case for Lupin In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85540 Anne Geldermann wrote: > So what is to stop Lupin, if he is evil, from trying to grab Harry a split > second too slowly and losing his grip as Harry hurtled by? Harry was > fighting as hard as he could to get to the dais. All ESE!Lupin would then > have to do would act incredibly horrified and guilty. The question here is why would ESE!Lupin wanted Harry to live? I've got a simple answer: he needs Harry alive to kill Voldemort. Harry will not be disposable until Voldie is out of the picture. So he never intended to kill him and only had to check if he could fire Sirius. And he was with Malfoy all the time. Both of them could have reasons to kill Sirius, separatedly or together. Silmariel From tcyhunt at earthlink.net Thu Nov 20 14:41:49 2003 From: tcyhunt at earthlink.net (Tracy Hunt) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 14:41:49 -0000 Subject: The Second WW Song (filk) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85541 The Second WW Song To the tune of The Christmas Song Dedicated to Caius Marcius - for inspiring my holiday spirit. sung by the newly discovered Hogwarts Choir: Muggles roasting on an open fire DE's cursing at your nose Mudblood traitors being hung by a wire and weaklings strung up by their toes Everybody knows the Trio & the Order, too hope to make it a good fight Mr. Fudge, with his wand all aglow will find it hard to sleep tonight He know that Thingy's on his way He's leaving lots of pain and sorrow in his wake And every witch's child is gonna hide With hope's that Dumbledore's really on their side And so I'm offering this simple phrase To witches from one to ninety-two Although it's been said many times, many ways Watch your backside, tonight! -tcy From liz at studylink.com Thu Nov 20 13:57:25 2003 From: liz at studylink.com (liz) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 14:57:25 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85542 > Kelly wrote: >> I think it's plausible that Mr. and Mrs. Weasley faced the same >> situation in which they were happy with the children they had, but >> just ended up having more children than they planned. > sera says: > I don't think so. Percy may have been an accident, and maybe they > wanted him to have a brother/sister closer to his age than Charlie > (why they had another child). But this "other child" turned out to be > twins. So if Mr. and Mrs. Weasley really intended to not have any more > children, they would have stopped after the twins. After all, that's > three more children than they "originally" wanted, in your theory. My theory is that they really, really wanted at least one girl and just kept going until they got one! Liz From belijako at online.no Thu Nov 20 15:34:52 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:34:52 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Organ Grinder (Fair is foul and foul is fair.) In-Reply-To: <20031120024908.7348.qmail@web41313.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85543 Clef wrote: > DD is so good, he seems too good to be true, which means he probably is. WS isn't kidding when he said fair is foul and foul is fair. He also calls Riddle, "Lord Voldemort" (CoS Am. vers. pg.329 and on), and as Harry pointed out to Snape in book 5 only DE's call him "Lord Voldemort." Or maybe book 2 was a slip up, b/c I can't find DD saying it again in any subsequant books. But then, if DD is above Riddle, he wouldn't call him his Lord, would he? Me: Just a little clarification: The DE's call their master "the Dark Lord", not "Lord Voldemort". they respect him/are too afraid of him to call him by his real name. Bellatrix went berserk when Harry dared to say his name in MoM... Only Dumbledore and Harry calls him "(Lord) Voldemort" (in OoP others like Hermione start doing it as well). So, DD saying "Lord Voldemort" is not really an argument for him "sympathizing" with Voldemort... Why is he using the title "Lord"? I don't know; maybe he's just being polite :-) He always insists on Harry addressing Snape as "Professor"... Berit From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Thu Nov 20 15:04:57 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 09:04:57 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stellar Brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000401c3af77$adb894f0$8a95aec7@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 85544 Iggy wrote: >> This info makes it all the more significant that Sirius's chosen >> Animagus form was a large, midnight black dog... doesn't it?? *grin* >Marianne: >Except that the witch/wizard does not choose her/his Animagus form.? >Sirius becoming a big, black dog just coincidently fits into this >discussion. ;-).? He could just as well have turned into a black >cocker spaniel... > Iggy here: Nope. While I don't have the book handy (and if anyone can find the quote for me, I would be grateful) Lupin told Harry that Sirius and James had chosen forms that would be capable of dealing with a large wolf. The form you become as an Animagus is not something that's "assigned" to you. It comes from what you chose to become, and often is a form that has advantages you seek out yourself. Rita Skeeter chose a flying beetle because it would allow her to seek out stories and get info by being a "fly on the wall," as it were. (Of course, Skeeter is also a Southern term for "Mosquito", so the name fits in well there too. *grin*) James chose a stag, and Sirius chose a large black dog (I think it was described as looking like a Mastiff... and if any of you who have seen would know, that's one *big* dog... usually only topped in sheer mass by a St. Bernard... and then only sometimes.) because their forms could deal with a wolf when needed. Peter became a rat because it would allow him to scout out information, and also because it would allow him to slip up to the Whomping Willow's trunk and touch the knot that "put it to sleep" for a little while. It's not your Animagus form that you don't actively chose, but the form of your Patronus that comes from something inside you and isn't chosen by the caster. (In some cases, it is probably chosen as an animal that you have a particular affinity for.) Iggy McSnurd From madoushi_clef_00 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 15:15:39 2003 From: madoushi_clef_00 at yahoo.com (Master Clef) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:15:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031120151539.45653.qmail@web41303.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85545 Tom: JKR also said that Snape will fall in love at some point. What if he all ready is and it's Narcissa. This could explain why he treats Draco so well when he knows his father is a DE. Mandy: First off, as weak as it is, I love the idea, simply because I personally have been intrigued by Narcissa's character for a while and desperately want her to become a player in the saga. But we know so little about her it all becomes purely speculative. And an affaire with Snape, or even James and having Draco being Harry's half brother, is very tantalizing. I have also hoped that she is one of Lily's school friends (along with Alice Longbottom) who can't come forward to help Harry because of who her family is. But it's all delightful speculation which I can't possibly back up. :-) Clef: It's almost not worth mentioning, but if Snape does love Narcissa, and not Lily as book 5 seemed to imply, it would add another entire dimension to Sirius's hatred of Severus. From belijako at online.no Thu Nov 20 15:43:29 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 15:43:29 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: <20031120151539.45653.qmail@web41303.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85546 Tom wrote: JKR also said that Snape will fall in love at some point. Me: I'm sorry, but this information is completely new to me. Does anyone know the exact wording? I've never heard about this "Rowling-canon". Berit From dmoorehpnc at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 15:56:09 2003 From: dmoorehpnc at yahoo.com (derek moore) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 07:56:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: The trouble with Percy Message-ID: <20031120155609.46009.qmail@web20509.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85547 "Tilly" wrote: > > Hi, > > My question is this is there any connection in Percy, who has > obviously > > gone bad in OoP being from a good family, and Sirus who is good > being > > from a bad family? Is this JKR's way of irony or is there something > > underlying in these two comparisons, maybe that Love is not the > root > > of all but friends and colleagues? > > Nikki aka wannabe Minerva McGonagall > Dmoorehpnc This Percy gone bad thing is quite interesting. I'm not convinced that Percy has gone bad, naive and miss guided yes, but DE evil I don't think so. That doesn't appear to be his character. Unless I missed something, I think that Percy (as well as the other Weasley Children) is reacting against being poor. I believe Percy thinks his way out of poverty is to be ambitious, follow the rules and cultivate "successful alliances". That's why he so adored Mr Couch (in Percy's eyes the perfect role model). The Twins see their road to riches is through their joke shop. Ron sees his through personal accomplishment/fame and achievement. Didn't Percy remark about his father's chosen line of work and his "alliances" as the cause of the families money woes? I tend to be more optimistic and see a reconciliation toward the end of books. When it all comes out Percy will see the virtue in his parent's choices, unfortunately tragedy may be what opens his eyes. dmoorehpnc --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Thu Nov 20 15:09:16 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: 20 Nov 2003 15:09:16 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1069340960.4329.56.camel@Bujold_RH> No: HPFGUIDX 85548 On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 15:43, Berit Jakobsen wrote: Tom wrote: JKR also said that Snape will fall in love at some point. Berit I'm sorry, but this information is completely new to me. Does anyone know the exact wording? I've never heard about this "Rowling-canon". Angel: I thought it was the opposite, that Rowling thought it quite a joke that Snape would fall in love/have someone in love with him. She said he might get what he want - or rather hinted at it - which implies the DADA theory I posted earlier From belijako at online.no Thu Nov 20 16:17:59 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:17:59 -0000 Subject: Quidditch commentator Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85549 Who do you think will get Lee Jordan's job now that he's left Hogwarts? The Quidditch games won't be the same without a witty commmentator... Any (obvious) candidates? I've thought of a couple: What about Ernie McMillan? Or is he too pompous and serious to be fun to listen to? At least he loves to hear his own voice... :-) Maybe a better suggestion would be one of the Creevey brothers! No one can muster their never-ending enthusiasm and excitement... Berit From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Thu Nov 20 16:35:03 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:35:03 -0000 Subject: Why do you like Harry Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85550 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Vicky Gwosdz" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gmail11220" > wrote: > > I am a senior at Kenyon College and I am doing a research paper for > my > > senior project on the role of fantasy and magic in our society. I am > > sure this question has come up many, many times. I am new to this > > group so I do not know what has been said. Why do you like the Harry > > Potter Books? I have read all the books myself but I am interested > in > > what other people think. This would greatly help my project. Thank > > you. To summarise a post I wrote in August (it's called "A loving companion", but I'm too lazy to search what number it is in the archives), I will use three adjectives: gripping (the story), erudite (the sources), touching (Harry). It's all that I usually love in a book, and this is one of the most brilliant i have ever read. It's a major page of literature, and we have the luck to see it write, or at least publicate. Good luck for your project, Amicalement, Iris From belijako at online.no Thu Nov 20 17:00:12 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 17:00:12 -0000 Subject: Holly and Yew Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85551 Forgive me if this has been said before. I tried to search the archives, but didn't find anything on the wood used in Harry and Voldemort's wands. What makes Harry and Voldemort's wands "brothers", are their core: A feather each from Fawkes the Phoenix. But the wood used in their wands differ from each other. Voldemort's is made of Yew and Harry's is made of Holly (PS p. 64-65 Bloomsbury). For fun, I looked up a little information on these trees at the www.botanical.com . Yew: The first thing that leaps at you when you look up the info on the Yew tree, is large angry letters in red: "POISON!" Both its leaves, seed and fruit are poisonous. In history and legend of Great Britain the tree is associated with places of worship. The wood is said to resist the action of water and is very hard, and, before the use of iron became general, was greatly valued. Holly (Holy Tree, Christ's Thorn): Is in the general mind closely connected with the festivities of Christmas. "...Pliny tells us that Holly if planted near a house or farm, repelled poison, and defended it from lightning and witchcraft, that the flowers cause water to freeze, and that the wood, if thrown at any animal, even without touching it, had the property of compelling the animal to return and lie down by it... The wood of Holly is hard, compact and of a remarkable even substance throughout... It is beautifully white, and being susceptible of a very high polish, is much prized for ornamental ware... The evenness of its grain makes it very valuable to the turner. When freshly cut, it is of a slightly greenish hue, but soon becomes perfectly white, and its hardness makes it superior to any other white wood..." That's interesting :-) Especially the part about Holly repelling poison(-ous Yew?), and defending against lightning and witchcraft. Berit From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Thu Nov 20 17:04:06 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 11:04:06 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Quidditch commentator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000301c3af88$52a78830$8a95aec7@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 85552 > >Who do you think will get Lee Jordan's job now that he's left >Hogwarts? The Quidditch games won't be the same without a witty >commentator... Any (obvious) candidates? > >I've thought of a couple: What about Ernie McMillan? Or is he too >pompous and serious to be fun to listen to? At least he loves to hear >his own voice... :-) > >Maybe a better suggestion would be one of the Creevey brothers! No >one can muster their never-ending enthusiasm and excitement... Iggy here: I think one of the Creevey brothers would be good. My personal favorite would be Luna Lovegood. (Can't you just see it now?) "And Potter goes into a dive after the snitch, just like a Bat-Winged Hamburger Snatcher. You know, they really exist, and can steal a burger off a plate in the blink of an eye, which is good for the burger industry since they have started to breed them to boost their sales. They're distantly related to the Crumple-Horned Snorkack, but only in some ways. They are much more closely related to the Flying Fumberwuzzles that lurk in the caves of Outer Mongolia. Ummm, oh, yeah, and Harry just got the snitch and won the game for Gryffindor." *grin* Iggy McSnurd (BTW: The Bat Winged Hamburger Snatcher mention was a tip of the hat to a little known cartoonist in San Francisco from the late 60s and early 70's, Mr. Dan O'Neil.) From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 20 16:24:14 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:24:14 -0000 Subject: Stellar Brothers In-Reply-To: <000401c3af77$adb894f0$8a95aec7@Einstein> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85553 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "IggyMcSnurd" wrote: Iggy: > >> This info makes it all the more significant that Sirius's chosen > >> Animagus form was a large, midnight black dog... doesn't it?? *grin* > > >Marianne: > >Except that the witch/wizard does not choose her/his Animagus form.? > >Sirius becoming a big, black dog just coincidently fits into this > >discussion. ;-).? He could just as well have turned into a black > >cocker spaniel... > > Iggy: > Nope. > > While I don't have the book handy (and if anyone can find the quote for > me, I would be grateful) Lupin told Harry that Sirius and James had > chosen forms that would be capable of dealing with a large wolf. > Human index coming up again - "Sirius and James transformed into such large animals, they were able to keep a werewolf in check." (POA chapter "moony, Worktail, Padfoot and Prongs p. 261 UK edition) Geoff From dmoorehpnc at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 16:23:16 2003 From: dmoorehpnc at yahoo.com (dmoorehpnc) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 16:23:16 -0000 Subject: Quidditch commentator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85554 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > Who do you think will get Lee Jordan's job now that he's left > Hogwarts? The Quidditch games won't be the same without a witty > commmentator... Any (obvious) candidates? > > I've thought of a couple: What about Ernie McMillan? Or is he too > pompous and serious to be fun to listen to? At least he loves to hear > his own voice... :-) > > Maybe a better suggestion would be one of the Creevey brothers! No > one can muster their never-ending enthusiasm and excitement... > > Berit Dmoorehpnc Three Cheers for Creevey Creevey! Creevey! Creevey! I think Colin Creevey would be an excellent choice. Who worships Harry more than him? dmoorehpnc From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Thu Nov 20 15:02:38 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: 20 Nov 2003 15:02:38 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1069340562.4329.53.camel@Bujold_RH> No: HPFGUIDX 85555 Kelly wrote: >> I think it's plausible that Mr. and Mrs. Weasley faced the same >> situation in which they were happy with the children they had, but >> just ended up having more children than they planned. sera says: > I don't think so. Percy may have been an accident, and maybe they > wanted him to have a brother/sister closer to his age than Charlie > (why they had another child). But this "other child" turned out to be > twins. So if Mr. and Mrs. Weasley really intended to not have any more > children, they would have stopped after the twins. After all, that's > three more children than they "originally" wanted, in your theory. Liz: > My theory is that they really, really wanted at least one girl and > just kept going until they got one! Angel: My theory is that there was a girl between Charlie and Percy, and she died. (see my fic 'Ludlow Fair' for the example: http://www.thedarkarts.org/authorLinks/Angel_Of_The_North/ ) We don't know how the witches work. It might be typical to have a child or two, then work for ten years, and then have more children. A life expectancy of 200 would suggest that child-bearing may well go on a lot later, and therefore this is an option. Or maybe they had so many children so that the population would pull out of decline :) From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 17:29:14 2003 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 17:29:14 -0000 Subject: Holly and Yew and Mimbulus, oh my! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85556 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > For fun, I looked up a > little information on these trees at the www.botanical.com . > > Yew: The first thing that leaps at you when you look up the info on > the Yew tree, is large angry letters in red: "POISON!" > Holly (Holy Tree, Christ's Thorn): repelled poison, and defended > it from lightning and witchcraft, > Berit I think "herbology" and mythical botony is indeed important in JKR's books. She must have a big book of plants on a shelf behind her. That Mimbleplant of Neville's was also important. Although she spelled it "Mimbulus," it sounds like the "Mimulus" plant that is used in Jungian Flower Essance Therapies (as mythical as witchcraft, probably) to instill courage and overcome timidity. It was also the folks who got sprayed with Mimbulus-stinksap on the Hogwarts train who, in the MoM, were fascinated by the enigmatic Veil (Neville, Ginny, Luna, and Harry. Hermione and Ron were up in the prefects' car and didn't get doused, and pulled the other four away from the undulating Veil.) Cut-paste of previous post about Mimbulus here: Wild, Wild Western Speculations: I thought I'd heard of a "Mimbulus" before, so I googled it, and there's a "Mimulus" which is native to the US. (I'm from Arizona. It's one of the few pretty flowers without razor-sharp spines. We have aggressive flora and fauna in the desert.) What's more, in the Great Basin area of the US, there's a variety of Mimulus called "Mimulus evanescens." Evans? Is that ever a coincidence? (Yes. Probably.) There's a South American version called Mimulus niaiandinus 'Andean Nymph'. Nymphs? Has Neville snuck a nymph into his bedroom? Here's an odd one: A collary to Jungian archetypal theory is the "Bach Flower Essences" approach to therapy. From weird website: "Archetypal Flower Essences made from plants representing the archetypes....Taking these remedies reminds the soul of the original archetypes within..., so that we can regain our original balanced personality. Archetypal essences in this kit include The Pilgrim; The Warrior; the Magician; The Trickster; The Heroine Within; and The Orphan.... They are not prescribed according to a patient's emotional needs but to his weakest archetypes. If a client is anxious, for example, a Bach flower therapist might prescribe him *Mimulus* [emphasis added] to assist him to find access to his inner courage." Neville's got a courage plant! Look at those other Jungian Archetypes! Eeek! Another Back Flower Essence website: "Mimulus is used as a type remedy for people who tend to be nervous, timid and shy generally. Sometimes people of this type may blush easily or stammer, and they will usually avoid social occasions and any event where they will be in the limelight. Mimulus is the remedy to encourage the quiet courage and strength that lies hidden in such people, so that they can face the everyday trials of life with steadfastness. Dr Bach's description: Fear of worldly things, illness, *pain* [emphasis added], accidents, poverty, of dark, of being alone, of misfortune. The fears of everyday life. These people quietly and secretly bear their dread, they do not freely speak of it to others." Sounds like our Neville, and sounds like our new and improved Neville! TK -- Tigerpatronus From annemehr at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 17:39:08 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 17:39:08 -0000 Subject: Stellar Brothers In-Reply-To: <000401c3af77$adb894f0$8a95aec7@Einstein> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85557 > Iggy here: > The form you become as an Animagus is not something that's "assigned" to > you. It comes from what you chose to become, and often is a form that > has advantages you seek out yourself. Annemehr: Actually, it seems pretty certain that you *don't* get to chose your animagus form. First of all, what Lupin actually says really tells us nothing about whether or not a wizard has a choice. From PoA, ch. 18, in the Shrieking Shack, Lupin speaking both times: "They transformed ... Peter, as the smallest, could slip beneath the Willow's attacking branches and touch the knot that freezes it." (ellipsis Rowling's) "Sirius and James turned into such large animals, they were able to keep a werewolf in check." Anything Lupin says about it (and the entire passage runs over two pages, so I won't reproduce it here) is completely neutral about whether they could chose their forms. However, Rowling has answered questions about this in chats. Here is a quote I got from the Scholastic Chat of Oct. 2000: Q: If you were Animagus, what kind of animal would you be? JKR: I'd like to be an otter ? that's my favourite animal. It would be depressing if I turned out to be a slug or something. So, if you accept what JKR says in interviews, that makes it pretty certain. Annemehr hoping Iggy still turns out to be a coyote :-) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 20 17:45:07 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 17:45:07 -0000 Subject: I love tragic endings In-Reply-To: <000001c3ae13$f850c380$6401a8c0@helenw1> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85558 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Helen R. Granberry" wrote: > In OotP, Dumbledore talks about this pain that is worse than death. > I don't think that pain is losing what you love; I think what is > worse than death is never knowing love at all -- or perhaps getting > a glimpse, and knowing it is too late for you, knowing it is > something you can never have because you made the wrong choices. > Voldemort has chosen mere existence over truly living. He has > forsaken all values in pursuit of this non-value ? living a life > that is really not a life at all. Voldemort can never know > happiness because he holds no values other than merely continuing > to exist. He can never know love. This is worse than death ? it is > a living death. > Helen, I agree with a lot of what you've said in this post [including the parts I snipped]. I *definitely* want a happy ending to this series. Roll your eyes, folks, call me names--I don't care. I'm being honest. I want Voldy dead & gone, even if that [of course!] doesn't mean dark wizards & witches are gone forever. I want Harry to have a future--I don't care whether he plays quidditch, becomes an auror, owns a bookstore in Muggle London. I don't care. I just want there to be that time for him to be "just Harry". I also don't buy that there are no others who could ever understand the scars he'd be living with. People can understand parts of it, and people can be helpful just in BEING there. Ginny has been possessed by & almost killed by Tom Riddle; she *can* understand some of what Harry has experienced. If even some of those people who've been around, supporting Harry since he came to Hogwarts--Ron, Hermione, Hagrid, Ginny, Lupin, DD, maybe even Luna--are still around, then he has hope for getting through the rough time after it's all over. ANYWAY, that's not really what I intended to respond to here. [Sorry.] It's your comments about Voldy. While I agree with you that he has chosen a mere existence over truly living, I do have to ask, are we SURE he has never known love or can never know love? Maybe I'm reading too much into things, but I get the feeling Bellatrix loves Voldy. Could it be a reciprocal thing--if not now, then possibly in the future if Voldy were to win? I still think his life would be less than "truly living" but just want to quibble w/ that one point of whether we *know* he hasn't or can't know love? Anyone care to shed light? Siriusly Snapey Susan...who definitely wants Harry to live but who would, if he were to die, be content with her copy of Arabella & Zsenya's After the End. :-) From norek_archives2 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 20 18:24:47 2003 From: norek_archives2 at hotmail.com (Janet Anderson) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:24:47 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85559 >But I *do* think she might have something subtler, such as "Narcissa >Malfoy was forced by societal/familial/economic pressure to marry >Lucius, but the love that she and Snape share is still strong." > >I'm not saying that I think JKR would endorse extramarital affairs, >just that she's the type of author that would go ahead and put them in >her book if she wanted to. I don't say it's impossible, merely that I think it's unlikely. (I don't think the Pullman books are a fair comparison because [in my opinion] they're set in a world where everyone is more or less corrupt, and because those books, while excellent, are inappropriate for the wide age groups that Harry Potter reaches -- I would never give them to someone under 14.) As for Narcissa, I think she's entirely too boring for Snape. But I may be wrong. Bellatrix may be a lot of things, but boring is not one of them. Even Andromeda Black Tonks, whom we never see, has two pieces of evidence that she was pretty interesting -- one, that she left her family to marry a Muggle, and two, Tonks herself, who presumably resembles both her parents. Maybe if we got a closer look at Narcissa she'd be as interesting as the rest of her family. And you do realize that if there *were* anything in all this speculation, that would mean that Snape was in love with the cousin of Sirius Black, who helped make his life miserable all through Hogwarts ... Janet Anderson _________________________________________________________________ >From the hottest toys to tips on keeping fit this winter, youll find a range of helpful holiday info here. http://special.msn.com/network/happyholidays.armx From templerichmond at earthlink.net Thu Nov 20 17:19:21 2003 From: templerichmond at earthlink.net (canismajorette) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 17:19:21 -0000 Subject: Stellar Brothers In-Reply-To: <000001c3aef8$389c5dc0$5393aec7@Einstein> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85560 > Iggy here: > > This info makes it all the more significant that Sirius's chosen > Anumagus form was a large, midnight black dog... doesn't it? *grin* > > One would also be inclined to wonder if Regulus was an Animagus as well, > and whether his alternate form was a lion. >From CAnisMajorette: Iggy is right. Rowling's choice of names for these characters and their animagi forms are no random matter. That she has Sirius Black transform into a dog is a blatant, underlined and capitalized statement that she is referring to Sirius, the Dog Star, Alpha Canis Major, and by implication, the entire esoteric doctrine that goes with that star. > Iggy here: > > Here's an interesting thing for you then... > > How would you describe someone with 5 elemental points in earth, 5 in > water, 3 in air, and none in fire? *grin* Answer from CanisMajorette: Why are you grinning? Well, 5 plus 5 plus 3 adds up to 13, which is more planets plus sun and moon than there are in the chart, of which there are only 10, so you must be speaking of angles or possibly of nodes. At any rate, the earth emphasis can bring practicality, water great powers of imagination, and air intellectual facility. However, there is no way in heaven to do an accurate assessment of any chart based on this information alone. CanisMajorette From lynch at agere.com Thu Nov 20 17:21:22 2003 From: lynch at agere.com (zihav) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 17:21:22 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85561 Tom said: > As the subject line says I think Narcissa is the ture spy for the > Order and Snape is only the go between. Snape can't possibly go > back to the Death Eaters he would be killed right away. > > JKR also said that Snape will fall in love at some point. What if > he all ready is and it's Narcissa. This could explain why he treats > Draco so well when he knows his father is a DE. ghinghapuss: > First off, as weak as it is, I love the idea, simply because I > personally have been intrigued by Narcissa's character for a while > and desperately want her to become a player in the saga. But we know > so little about her it all becomes purely speculative. And an > affaire with Snape, or even James and having Draco being Harry's half > brother, is very tantalizing. I have also hoped that she is one of > Lily's school friends (along with Alice Longbottom) who can't come > forward to help Harry because of who her family is. But it's all > delightful speculation which I can't possibly back up. :-) Tom: Hello again, wow this has been taken way out of context. I only said that Snape might be in love with Narcissa, but have no canon to back that up. It's complete speculation based on one of JKR's online chat's (which I can't find at the moment needless to say) when she's asked if Snape would fall in love. That *doesn't* mean he's having an affair, just that he has strong feels about her. She might not feel the same way or even know. I think the point I was trying to make that Narcissa is in a much better position to be the spy for the Order and not Snape. We do know Snape is getting information, but from who and how? Narcissa is the who I believe and I just wanted to establish motive. I do like the idea that Lily and Narcissa and Alice Longbottom all went to school together and knew each other and maybe very good friends, just like Harry's father and his friends. Hopefully I've clarified my theory... Tom From fuzzlebub85 at aol.com Thu Nov 20 17:21:56 2003 From: fuzzlebub85 at aol.com (fuzzlebub85 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 12:21:56 EST Subject: Quidditch commentator Message-ID: <146.1cece5a4.2cee5234@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85562 Berit asked: > Who do you think will get Lee Jordan's job now that he's left > Hogwarts? Yes! New Quidditch commentator! I hope it's Hermione... "Ron Weasley saves another goal! I see he's balancing Quidditch practice with homework quite well lately...and Harry Potter catches the snitch! Well done, 150 points for Gryffindor! Gryffindor wins! Macmillan and Abbott are disappointed..." From syndicateblue at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 18:34:24 2003 From: syndicateblue at yahoo.com (syndicateblue) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:34:24 -0000 Subject: Snape referring to LV as "The Dark Lord" Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85563 As you all probably know, one of the things that JKR likes to do is suddenly interrupt when something important is about to be revealed. This is one of her "clue patterns:" if we are suddenly interrupted, pay close attention because it may have significance later on. I believe in Book 5, during one of the occlumancy lessons, in his anger Harry finally confronts Snape about him referring to LV as "The Dark Lord." He asks him why Snape still refers to LV as "The Dark Lord," since the only people that ever call him that are Death Eaters. Right when Snape is about to answer, they hear a sudden crashing and screaming upstairs (I think the firing of Trelawney) and Snape runs off, leaving Harry with the Pensieve. Could the answer that Snape was about to give have any significance to the plot? From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Nov 20 19:10:58 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:10:58 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85564 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > The people we know best who have "a certain disregard for rules" are > Harry himself and Ron (now joined by Hermione)--all Gryffindors. I'm > pretty certain that Sirius, who empathizes so strongly with Harry and > sees him almost as a reincarnation of James, would not feel that way > if he and James (and Remus and Peter) had not also been Gryffindors. Jen R: Here's the full quote from Dumbledore, describing why the sorting hat considered Harry for Slytherin: "You happen to have many qualitites Salazar Slytherin prized in his hand-picked students. His own very rare gift, Parseltongue--resourcefulness--determination--a certain disregard for the rules" (COS,US, chap. 18, p. 332). I agree with your thoughts on Sirius, although I wonder if students prior to the rise of LV/DE's viewed Slytherin with the same anipathy as the current generation? If Sirius was in Slytherin, he would most certainly reject that house, like he did his own family, when he found out many Slytherins became DE's. I don't think that fact came to light until after they graduated, because in GOF Sirius says: "he {Snape} was part of a gang of Slytherins who nearly all turned out to be Death Eaters" (GOF, chap. 27, p. 531). It doesn't sound like they were Death Eaters when he was in school with them, nor was it all the Slytherins--just one gang. Carol: > The member of the Order with the highest regard for rules is, of all > people, Snape, that notorious giver of detention to rule breakers who > happens to be Head of Slytherin. > Jen: I have yet to hear Snape give a Slytherin detention or take points from his house! Perhaps it happens out of Harry's earshot, but I think Snape, while loyal and mostly obedient to Dumbledore's orders, can be selective when it comes to school rules directed at students. Carol: > Also as Huntergreen said (and as I noted in another post), we see no > evidence of the quintessential Slytherin trait, ambition, in Sirius or > James (both of whom are rich--JKR has said in interviews that James's > wealth is inherited). Unlike Snape, who put everything he has into > that lengthy response to the DADA exam, James, Sirius, and Remus take > it almost as a joke (the werewolf remarks, remember?). And poor > Remus--what kind of ambition can he have, given the universal (and not > entirely unjustified) prejudice against werewolves? Jen: Ambition doesn't have to be a quest for money. Certainly the Order is ambitious in their quest to defeat Voldemort. Ambition has come to mean 'greed' in this day and age, but ambition in and of itself isn't a bad characteristic. The sorting hat said about Slytherins: "Those cunning folks use any means to achieve their ends." (SS, chap. 7, 118). The Order members don't use sinister means to achieve their ends, but they are willing to break laws, break ranks with the status quo, to defeat Voldemort. Carol: > Anyway, I sympathize with you in wanting to clear up the misconception > (which is partly the result of Harry's POV) that all Slytherins are > evil, but I don't think that the MWPP are Slytherins. They're somewhat > recklessly brave and not at all ambitious. Their disregard for rules > doesn't automatically put them in Slytherin any more than it kept > Snape out. His ambition (and perhaps his fascination for the dark > arts) put him in Slytherin; their courage (and perhaps their antipathy > to the dark arts) put them (almost certainly) in Gryffindor. Jen: I'm enjoying considering the possiblity; it's interesting to see just how mutable the qualitites of the different characters are in regard to their Houses. I stand by MWPP being ambitious, though! Becoming illegal animagi, making the Marauders Map, joining the Order. MWPP may have directed their energies to self-serving ends at times, but they accomplished quite a lot. Carol: > I think putting them in Gryffindor would actually help your argument > that Gryffindors are not necessarily "good" and Slytherins are not > necessarily "evil." Who better than MWPP to show that imperfect people > ("arrogant little berks"!) can be assigned to Gryffindor? Jen: Perhaps at the time of the Pensieve incident, it would help my argument to say MWPP were in Gryffindor. During that time James was hexing anyone who annoyed him, Sirius picked on Snape because he was bored, and Lupin lacked the courage to stop them. But as they mature, it does more for my argument if they were in Slytherin: something happened to change them from being 'idiots' as Sirius calls MWPP in retrospect, to men who show unbelievable courage in the face of a losing battle against Voldemort (I assume Wormtail showed some courage before turning traitor). It's an interesting debate, although in the end I tend to agree MWPP were in Gryffindor. Reading all the posts have helped me realize that the sorting hat's decision is a gray area at best. We know of several people now (i.e. Harry, Hermione, Neville) who were considered for other houses before finally being sorted into Gryffindor. I would think most people would do well in more than one house. From marylandman1115 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 19:00:42 2003 From: marylandman1115 at yahoo.com (marylandman1115) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:00:42 -0000 Subject: Challenging Lexicon timeline, Ron's dead brother, Time In-Reply-To: <3598EC6B.60F03579.4B073798@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85565 I have been reading a lot of these posts and the one problem that I have is why would V only go after one Weasley and why would it be the one boy in the middle? If he were to go after anyone to kill, you would think it would be Mr. Weasley for the work he does for the MoM. Since time is possibly a big thing that comes out in the story, as in the time turners, could the veil be a parallel time and it was Ron's voice he really heard? Just a thought.... Tim (new to here and my first post) From seuferer at netins.net Thu Nov 20 19:05:13 2003 From: seuferer at netins.net (shanti_50130) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:05:13 -0000 Subject: The trouble with Percy In-Reply-To: <20031120155609.46009.qmail@web20509.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85566 > Unless I missed something, I think that Percy (as well as the other Weasley Children) is reacting against being poor. I believe Percy thinks his way out of poverty is to be ambitious, follow the rules and cultivate "successful alliances". That's why he so adored > Mr Couch (in Percy's eyes the perfect role model). > > Didn't Percy remark about his father's chosen line of work and his "alliances" as the cause of the families money woes? > > I tend to be more optimistic and see a reconciliation toward the end of books. When it all comes out Percy will see the virtue in his parent's choices, unfortunately tragedy may be what opens his eyes. > I have also read some theories on Percy being a spy for the Order, one that only Dumbledore knows is a spy. If this is the case, he would have to sever all ties with his family in order to be able to get "in" close with the Ministry. Another though I have is that *tragically* I think perhaps Percy will die before they ever completely mend fences. What if he dies defending one of his family members at the last moment, in a kind of martyr-ish sacrifice. His family would have the comfort of knowing that he was on their side, in the end, but never the completion of a true reconcilliation. I think this is a more likely result than Percy admitting he was wrong. I truly believe he thought he was "simply following orders" and, as you suggest here, was trying to work his way into wealth and power. "Percy's really ambitious, you know?" --Ron in PoA Lisa From stevejjen at earthlink.net Thu Nov 20 19:21:12 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:21:12 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: <1069340960.4329.56.camel@Bujold_RH> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85567 > Tom wrote: > > JKR also said that Snape will fall in love at some point. > > Berit: > > I'm sorry, but this information is completely new to me. Does anyone > know the exact wording? I've never heard about this "Rowling- canon". > > > Angel: I thought it was the opposite, that Rowling thought it quite a > joke that Snape would fall in love/have someone in love with him. She > said he might get what he want - or rather hinted at it - which implies > the DADA theory I posted earlier Jen R: I think this is the quote being referred to, although it's ambiguous of course! Q: One of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love. JKR:(JKR laughs) Who on earth would want Snape in love with them? That's a very horrible idea. Q: There's an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape JKR: He, um, there's so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I'm slightly stunned that you've said that and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if you read Book 7. That's all I'm going to say. http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/1999/1099- connectiontransc.html From marylandman1115 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 19:28:53 2003 From: marylandman1115 at yahoo.com (marylandman1115) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:28:53 -0000 Subject: Dirty on Dumbledore & who will Harry confide in? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85568 lily_paige_delaney wrote: > Does anyone else think that it was strange that Dumbledore just lets > Harry leave his office thinking his only fate is to be murdered or be > the murderer? He doesn't even offer any help! What kind of way is > that to treat someone? Especially someone you profess to love? > Tim: DD also talks about choices as well. Maybe it is time for Harry to make his choices in life. This being the biggest one of all Kill or be Killed. Harry is at a point that he needs to start doing these things on his own to survive. Harry knows deep down that DD is there and DD know if Harry needs help he will ask. Tim From seuferer at netins.net Thu Nov 20 19:35:41 2003 From: seuferer at netins.net (shanti_50130) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:35:41 -0000 Subject: Why do you like Harry Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85569 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gmail11220" wrote: > I am a senior at Kenyon College and I am doing a research paper for my > senior project on the role of fantasy and magic in our society. I am > sure this question has come up many, many times. I am new to this > group so I do not know what has been said. Why do you like the Harry > Potter Books? I have read all the books myself but I am interested in > what other people think. This would greatly help my project. Thank > you. Well, I can resoundingly second all the responses you have gotten so far, and add a few of my own. Harry Potter (HP), recently, is being often compared to Lord of the Rings. (LOTR) Writing style, characters, etc. Honestly I see very little similarity. Okay, there is one main bad guy, and one main somewhat reluctant hero, good vs evil, etc. But I have read hundreds of magical/fantasly type books. David Eddings. Terry Brooks. Anne McCaffery. I could go on and on. I am an avid reader, and this is my favorite genre. To me, to compare Harry Potter to LOTR does no justice to either work, and allows me to illustrate why I like HP better. Tolkein has vivid descriptions in his works. But for my own taste, they are TOO vivid. He describes the moss on the trees with a minuteness that removes all possiblilty of imagination. I know what Treebeard looks like because Tolkein told me, down to every last twig and leaf. And in the process of telling me, he uses big, ponderous, old-fashioned descriptive adjectives, phrases, and clauses that are sometimes difficult to read. Of course, it adds somewhat to the flavor of the book--one feels as though one is reading an historical account of events. But to me it makes it more dry and less enjoyable to read than HP. Please note, I am a college grad myself, and have no difficulty reading or comprehending such things, I just don't like to have to reread a sentence five or six times before I can make sense of it. Tolkien has so many twists and turns in his sentence structure, that often the main point of the sentence comes at the end, and once you get there, you have to go back and reread the beginning so you understand the reference. JKR has just as much detail, imagery, depth in her story. But she presents it in a more straight-forward fashion. My imagination soars with vivid pictures and ideas as I read her words, because my rational brain does not have to work to sort out the actual text. I love that she presents her messages and lessons to her characters gently to the reader, though they may be harsh to the characters. I am amazed at how fully she has fleshed out even the more minor characters. How a woman briefly mentioned in the earlier books as that "batty Mrs. Figg who loves cats" can become such an important character in book 5. A name dropped seemingly without importance in book 1 resurfaces in book 3 as a significant character. (Sirius Black) Her books are complex, without being confusing; detailed without being dull and lifeless; realistic in the character emotions and responses without being morbid, depressing, mundane. I feel as though I know Harry, Ron, Hermione, Dumbledore, McGonnagal, Hagrid, Lupin, Sirius, all the Weasleys, as though they are alive and real in my mind. As though I could pop in for tea with Molly and possibly expect to see Ron and Harry walk in the door after practicing quidditch on the back hill. To me they are more well 'fleshed out' and realisticly written, three dimensional, even the more minor characters, than any other fantasy book I have ever read. I love the hints and clues that she drops along the way. I never catch them the first time through myself, but I love getting to the end and going "OH, YEA, that makes sense now! She told us that before!" I have read the first four dozens, litterally dozens of times, and I catch something new each time. They are not boring or dull, even after many times through. I am just visiting an old friend. And my favorite thing about the HP books is the gift of a love of reading that JKR has given to so very many children in this age of multimedia brain-drain! From seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk Thu Nov 20 19:42:08 2003 From: seraphina_snape at yahoo.co.uk (seraphina_snape) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:42:08 -0000 Subject: Snape referring to LV as "The Dark Lord" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85570 syndicateblue wrote: > [Harry]asks him why Snape still refers to LV > as "The Dark Lord," since the only people that ever call him that > are Death Eaters. sera says: But Trelawney says in PoA: "It will happen tonight. The Dark Lord lies alone and friendless, abondoned by his followers. His servant..." (p. 349, UK version) In her prediction towards Harry, she calls Voldemort "The Dark Lord". But if you don't think Trelawney is a DE, how can you say that only DEs call him the "Dark Lord"? She does. Waiting for an explanation, sera From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Thu Nov 20 20:19:45 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:19:45 -0000 Subject: Snape referring to LV as "The Dark Lord" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85571 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "seraphina_snape" wrote: > > sera says: > > But Trelawney says in PoA: "It will happen tonight. The Dark Lord lies > alone and friendless, abondoned by his followers. His servant..." (p. > 349, UK version) > > In her prediction towards Harry, she calls Voldemort "The Dark Lord". > But if you don't think Trelawney is a DE, how can you say that only > DEs call him the "Dark Lord"? She does. > > Waiting for an explanation, > sera But Trelawney was possesed. It might not be herself, who spoke the predictions. However, I don't know why Harry thinks, that only DE call him "The Dark Lord". Fudge called him so, and as far as we (and Harry) know, he isn't a Death Eater. Even Ernie MacMillan said "Dark Lord". Hickengruendler From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 20 20:34:25 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:34:25 -0000 Subject: I *love* tragic endings ! (Was : Re: What if Harry dies?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85572 Iris wrote: > On the other hand, I would be glad if I could shut the book > saying "He did it, he survived". > However, I'm not sure this ending would be as satisfying to him as > we could imagine. > First, as Joseph Campbell wrote, it's difficult to a hero to find > his own place in the world he saved. Actually, he is not in the > same world anymore, because the initiation he went through put him > in another dimension. When Harry defeats Voldemort, he will be > definitely different from his friends and from the other wizards. > How will he live among people who will treat him like a phenomenon? > Who will always demand perfection from him? His closest friends (if > they survive ) will certainly treat him "normally", but the others > won't. He will have very few rights ( right to weakness, to > mistake ) and a lot of duties. Now me: What about the possibility that sometime before the final battle [we all seem to be assuming it will be some big monstrous final battle, anyway], MANY MORE wizards & witches will join the ranks of those willing to fight--The Order, Dumbledore's Army, perhaps a new organization or army? What if, even if it IS Harry who has to be the one to kill Voldemort, hundreds of others are right there beside him, pushing back & eliminating Voldy's Death Eaters? Then, even though Harry would take that final action to ensure total victory, there would truly be hundreds [or thousands?] of others right there to [rightfully!] share in the glory. THAT would remove some of those pressures you went on to talk about. In short, I don't see that it would have to be seen as "all Harry" again. Look at SS/PS. Harry gets 60 points for his actions, yes, but Hermione & Ron each get 50, and Neville gets 10. Harry DIDN'T do it all by himself then. And look at what the members of the DA and the Order already did in the Ministry of Magic near the end of Book Five. No way Harry could have survived if it had been just HIM. With another year or two to build up to the climactic battle, who's to say he won't then be surrounded by a huge number of "helpers", which will take much of the pressure off of him? Siriusly Snapey Susan From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Thu Nov 20 20:52:18 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:52:18 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85573 Just to clarify, everyone-- This attribution is incorrect. These are NOT MY WORDS!! In fact, I was writing in to COUNTER this comment! Siriusly Snapey Susan --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "crisagi1" wrote: > > > > Yes, I always thought that just because every dark witch or > > wizard > > > that went bad, was in Slytherin House, it doesn't necessarily > mean > > > that all those in Slytherin House are dark witches and wizards. > > > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan > > ME: > Not all of the bad wizards/witches are from Slytherin. Look at the > rat... 'wormtail' > > Then again look at Snape... ok bad example, but it does go to prove > that life is a matter of choices, and at any given time we have the > right to choose to change if we wish. > > crisagi From pjcousins at btinternet.com Thu Nov 20 20:49:29 2003 From: pjcousins at btinternet.com (confusinglyso) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:49:29 -0000 Subject: Ron's Dead Brother in Casablanca Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85574 I started the thread "Ron's Dead Brother" ( post #85269, reproduced below) hoping for comments on whether members' theories agreed that Harry thinking Ron was beyond 'The VEIL' is significant. So far, most responses have discussed the 'missing Weasley' part only, yet I thought this an already well established theory, though not fact. I apologise for not being able to give credit to who first mentioned the 'missing Weasley'. Harry calling out "Is that you, Ron?" at the veil suggests 3 possibilities to me:- 1. A living person beyond the veil sounds like Ron. 2. A dead person beyond the veil sounds like Ron. 3. JKR is foreshadowing Ron's death :-( Now my earlier post #83373 'The VEIL' covered option 1. My recent post #85269 begins to deal with option 2, but I hope now to expand the idea with some later thoughts. IF, note- as far as I'm concerned a big IF, the voices are from 'the dead', to match Harry's reactions to the scenario, I suggested that the 'missing Weasley' (popular theory, sorry unknown originator) was beyond the veil and his voice sounded like Ron's. I am guessing that the dead boy would have died at about same age as Ron is now. Now comes the next leap of faith. 'Of all the veils in all the dungeons in all the world, demised Weasley is in Harry's Department of Mysteries' (Casablanca) Why, if the veil separates the living from the dead, would a single voice be 'identifiable' from what should surely be an enormous number of dead people? Any large crowd creates a Babel, even emanating as a murmur through the veil, it should be impossible to distinguish identities. So, if Harry is able to 'recognise' a voice mistakenly(? time turners notwithstanding), does this suggest that there are only a few dead people beyond the veil in the Department of Mysteries? If only a few, what are they there for? Are the unspeakables in contact with them? Are they trying to bring them back to life? How were they chosen? Are they the children killed in VW1 ? As part of my research (stretching the term to breaking point ;-)) I checked my thesaurus (Collins) and got quite a surprise I had already noticed the similarity between Department of Mysteries and Chamber of Secrets One thought, what if they are 2 names for the same thing ? Then I had a trivial thought :- Studio of Weird Sisters could be next title :-) then the thesaurus Checking CHAMBER gives HOLLOW Checking MYSTERY gives RIDDLE Riddle's Hollow anyone ? Has this been mentioned before? I still think the voices are from the living, and answer the question " Where were Arthur and Molly Weasley during MoM fight?". Again, I point to post #83373. Quote below obtained from www.imdb.com The Internet Movie Database. Casablanca (1942) Rick Blaine (Humphrey Bogart) says, "Of all the gin joints in all the towns in all the world, she walks into mine." Full reproduction of my starting post of Ron's Dead Brother Post Number #85269, Tue 18 November 2003 OoP Chapter 'The Department of Mysteries' UK page 683 Harry and Luna hear voices from beyond the veil. "Someone's whispering behind there," he (Harry) said, moving out of her (Hermione) reach and continuing to frown at the veil. "Is that you, Ron?" "I'm here, mate," said Ron. If Harry hears a voice similar to Ron's, could it be the voice of the often speculated 'missing Weasley' ? A brother between Charlie + Bill --- gap --- and Percy. Remember in GoF at Wizard World Cup, Arthur Weasley explains to the youngsters the fear of coming home and finding the Dark Mark hovering over your house. Arthur may have been talking from personal experience. I am not as well read as many of you theorists on this excellent site, and my simple reading of 'the veil' does not come over as 'boundary with the dead', but I seem to be a minority of one, lol. If the voices are from the dead, could the 'missing Weasley' be there? Would the dead brother have been about Ron's age, to sound like him? For my (idiotic) theories if the voices are from the living, and living Weasleys to be exact, see my post number #83373 Phil(istine) From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Thu Nov 20 21:11:03 2003 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:11:03 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Holly and Yew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031120211103.86336.qmail@web25110.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85575 Berit wrote: Forgive me if this has been said before. I tried to search the archives, but didn't find anything on the wood used in Harry and Voldemort's wands. What makes Harry and Voldemort's wands "brothers", are their core: A feather each from Fawkes the Phoenix. But the wood used in their wands differ from each other. Voldemort's is made of Yew and Harry's is made of Holly (PS p. 64-65 Bloomsbury). For fun, I looked up a little information on these trees at the www.botanical.com . Yew: The first thing that leaps at you when you look up the info on the Yew tree, is large angry letters in red: "POISON!" Both its leaves, seed and fruit are poisonous. In history and legend of Great Britain the tree is associated with places of worship. The wood is said to resist the action of water and is very hard, and, before the use of iron became general, was greatly valued. Holly (Holy Tree, Christ's Thorn): Is in the general mind closely connected with the festivities of Christmas. "...Pliny tells us that Holly if planted near a house or farm, repelled poison, and defended it from lightning and witchcraft, that the flowers cause water to freeze, and that the wood, if thrown at any animal, even without touching it, had the property of compelling the animal to return and lie down by it... The wood of Holly is hard, compact and of a remarkable even substance throughout... It is beautifully white, and being susceptible of a very high polish, is much prized for ornamental ware... The evenness of its grain makes it very valuable to the turner. When freshly cut, it is of a slightly greenish hue, but soon becomes perfectly white, and its hardness makes it superior to any other white wood..." That's interesting :-) Especially the part about Holly repelling poison(-ous Yew?), and defending against lightning and witchcraft. U_P_D From JKR's previous record do you honestly believe that this is an accident? Udder Pendragon ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --------------------------------- Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Thu Nov 20 19:58:28 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: 20 Nov 2003 19:58:28 +0000 Subject: The trouble with Percy In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1069358316.4333.77.camel@Bujold_RH> No: HPFGUIDX 85576 dmoorehpnc wrote: > Unless I missed something, I think that Percy (as well as the other Weasley Children) is reacting against being poor. I believe Percy thinks his way out of poverty is to be ambitious, follow the rules and cultivate "successful alliances". That's why he so adored > Mr Couch (in Percy's eyes the perfect role model). > > Didn't Percy remark about his father's chosen line of work and his "alliances" as the cause of the families money woes? > > I tend to be more optimistic and see a reconciliation toward the end of books. When it all comes out Percy will see the virtue in his parent's choices, unfortunately tragedy may be what opens his eyes. > I have also read some theories on Percy being a spy for the Order, one that only Dumbledore knows is a spy. If this is the case, he would have to sever all ties with his family in order to be able to get "in" close with the Ministry. Another though I have is that *tragically* I think perhaps Percy will die before they ever completely mend fences. What if he dies defending one of his family members at the last moment, in a kind of martyr-ish sacrifice. His family would have the comfort of knowing that he was on their side, in the end, but never the completion of a true reconcilliation. I think this is a more likely result than Percy admitting he was wrong. I truly believe he thought he was "simply following orders" and, as you suggest here, was trying to work his way into wealth and power. "Percy's really ambitious, you know?" --Ron in PoA Lisa The bit in OOTP that always gets me is when Sirius says 'maybe we won't be around to forgive' and of course, he isn't. From belijako at online.no Thu Nov 20 21:25:25 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:25:25 -0000 Subject: Quidditch commentator In-Reply-To: <146.1cece5a4.2cee5234@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85577 fuzzlebub85 wrote: > Yes! New Quidditch commentator! I hope it's Hermione... > "Ron Weasley saves another goal! I see he's balancing Quidditch practice with > homework quite well lately...and Harry Potter catches the snitch! Well done, > 150 points for Gryffindor! Gryffindor wins! Macmillan and Abbott are > disappointed..." Me: Hermione would be an interesting new installment... :-) The only problem with her is that she isn't really that interested in Quidditch so she might have problems commenting on what she sees. Or maybe not :-) Berit From belijako at online.no Thu Nov 20 21:31:30 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:31:30 -0000 Subject: Quidditch commentator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85578 Iggy wrote: My personal favorite would be Luna Lovegood. (Can't you just see it now?) "And Potter goes into a dive after the snitch, just like a Bat-Winged Hamburger Snatcher. You know, they really exist, and can steal a burger off a plate in the blink of an eye, which is good for the burger industry since they have started to breed them to boost their sales. They're distantly related to the Crumple-Horned Snorkack, but only in some ways. They are much more closely related to the Flying Fumberwuzzles that lurk in the caves of Outer Mongolia. Ummm, oh, yeah, and Harry just got the snitch and won the game for Gryffindor." Me: That was hilarious Iggy :-))) I didn't even think about Luna! But she would be awesome (the students might not think so though, but who cares as long as we, the readers, are entertained :-) Berit From michaeljacksonfan1970 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 21:28:38 2003 From: michaeljacksonfan1970 at yahoo.com (michaeljacksonfan1970) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:28:38 -0000 Subject: Why do you like Harry Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85579 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gmail11220" wrote: > I am a senior at Kenyon College and I am doing a research paper for my > senior project on the role of fantasy and magic in our society. I am > sure this question has come up many, many times. I am new to this > group so I do not know what has been said. Why do you like the Harry > Potter Books? I like how the author is able to build compelling characters with very little physical description. The reader doesn't know all that much about Lupin, for instance, but still I get a certain feel for him that I don't get when I read other childrens' books. I also like how the books are really funny in places. I didn't think OoP was very funny, but I thought Goblet of Fire was really cute at times. I don't know if that helps you with your project, but I think it is neat that Harry Potter has caused som many people to think about fantasy and read fantasy books now. ~Madeline From augustinapeach at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 21:43:48 2003 From: augustinapeach at yahoo.com (augustinapeach) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:43:48 -0000 Subject: I *love* tragic endings ! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85580 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Iris wrote: On the other hand, I would be glad if I could shut the book saying "He did it, he survived". However, I'm not sure this ending would be as satisfying to him as we could imagine. > > First, as Joseph Campbell wrote, it's difficult to a hero to find his own place in the world he saved. Actually, he is not in the same world anymore, because the initiation he went through put him in another dimension. When Harry defeats Voldemort, he will be definitely different from his friends and from the other wizards. > > > > Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > What about the possibility that sometime before the final battle [we all seem to be assuming it will be some big monstrous final battle, anyway], MANY MORE wizards & witches will join the ranks of those willing to fight--The Order, Dumbledore's Army, perhaps a new organization or army? What if, even if it IS Harry who has to be the one to kill Voldemort, hundreds of others are right there beside him, pushing back & eliminating Voldy's Death Eaters? (snip) In short, I don't see that it would have to be seen as "all Harry" again. Look at SS/PS. Harry gets 60 points for his actions, yes, but Hermione & Ron each get 50, and Neville gets 10. Harry DIDN'T do it all by himself then. And look at what the members of the DA and the Order already did in the Ministry of Magic near the end of Book Five. No way Harry could have survived if it had been just HIM. With another year or two to build up to the climactic battle, who's to say he won't then be surrounded by a huge number of "helpers", which will take much of the pressure off of him? Now AP: I agree with you, Susan. I think one of the lessons JKR is teaching us in this series is the absolute necessity of working together. I read a review once that bashed Harry as a type of non-heroic, spoiled athlete because he had help in everything he had accomplished. My response is that Harry is not the typical hero that Campbell describes and that we've seen deified in movies like "Rambo" (and many, many others). Harry is able to do the extraordinary things he does not only because he has innate abilities and courage but also because he has the good sense to take advantage of the help available to him, whether it is Hermione's knowledge or the Sorting Hat Fawkes brought to him. Even if he ends up alone in the final battle (as he always seems too), he wouldn't have gotten to that battle without working with someone else. I think there are some interesting ideas related to this "theme" in OoP. During his angry phase, Harry seems to forget that others helped him. He feels hurt and angry for being left in the dark when he's thinks he's the one who has done all the fighting recently (don't have my book with me, so can't cite canon). It's like he is falling into thinking of himself as that "do it alone" kind of hero. He was ready to rush off to the MoM alone to rescue Sirius. That would probably have been disastrous. I think JKR has lessons in store for Harry. Even though Harry doesn't realize it at the end of OoP, I think he is going to come to see that the kind of situation you've outlined above is what it will take to defeat Voldemort. Being a hero doesn't always mean going it alone; sometimes it may mean being willing to recognize and use the combined strengths of many people -- or in this case, magical beings. The clue, IMO, is Hermione's problem with her runes test -- that she mixed up the runes for "partnership" and "defense." I don't think it is an accident that she mixed up those two words, and I don't think it is a reflection on Hermione's personality (an argument I saw in a post on this board once). I think JKR is dropping a big ole' hint! From jestahijinx at hotmail.com Thu Nov 20 22:03:41 2003 From: jestahijinx at hotmail.com (Jesta Hijinx) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:03:41 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Hermione Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85581 > > >As for your questions, while I strongly disagree with the assessment of >Hermione as a "little spoiled arrogant brat," I can see why someone >might have a negative reaction to her character. She's assertive to >the point of pushiness, always says what she thinks, and *can* be >insensitive in the form of putting logic before emotion (as in the case >of Lavender's bunny). Many people don't like this in a woman. Heck, a >lot of people don't like this in *anyone*. > Laura, Astute observations. >On the other hand, she's also brave enough to stand up for what she >believes is right, no matter what the consequences (e.g. Trelawney, >Umbridge, Harry's Firebolt). As a great man once said, "It takes a >great deal of courage to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to >stand up to our friends." She's a *good* friend, the kind that tells >you what you *need* to hear, rather than what you *want* to hear. Not >only that, she *is* compassionate in many instances in the book. For >instance, she is the only student who consistently doesn't look down on >Neville or treat him poorly -- remember during Moody's first class when >he Crucio'ed that spider and Neville freaked out? Hermione not only >was the only one to notice his fear, but also the only one to care >enough to tell Moody to stop. (If you hadn't noticed, I have a bit of a >soft spot for Neville ^_^.) > Again, very astute observations. It's one thing to say on a surface level that someone like Hermione is "annoying" or "obnoxious"; it takes a much braver soul to look at one's own self and determine if the criticism is justified. I for one admire Hermione for pursuing her passions, especially in a logical and organized fashion, instead of being somenoe fascinated with lip gloss. > >As for JKR being arrogant -- well, in her position, *I* would certainly >feel pretty superior ^_~. However, I don't really get the feeling from >interviews that she's 'arrogant', per se. Maybe a little 'difficult.' >She has a rather infuriating sense of humor when it comes to answering >questions. I wouldn't have her any other way, though. > She's remarkably down to earth for a successful artistic personality. Also - keep in mind that there may be people who are threatened by a smart person who remains elusive about things a general public really wants to know - even if they're protecting their own interests and livelihood. That doesn't make the person arrogant. I, for one, am not a fan of false humility either. Felinia _________________________________________________________________ Set yourself up for fun at home! Get tips on home entertainment equipment, video game reviews, and more here. http://special.msn.com/home/homeent.armx From ohyouaretheroots at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 22:01:29 2003 From: ohyouaretheroots at yahoo.com (ohyouaretheroots) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:01:29 -0000 Subject: My predictions for book 6 & 7 (deaths, relationSHIPs, etc) In-Reply-To: <20030726032636.52109.qmail@web20711.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85582 beyondtheveil imustnottelllies wrote: > Despite the vagueness of the prophecy, I think that by the end of Ootp JKR made her intentions quite clear. "Either must die at the hand of the other" refers to two people, and two people only: Voldemort and Harry. She has only done what we all expected anyways.... the final battle will be between Voldemort and Harry. There cannot be any "other character" intervention. I have to agree that there is little to no room for any "other" person in the prophecy. If it was simply stated "Either must die at the hand of the other" it would be plausible, but it seems we are forgetting the second half of that passage: "for neither can live while the other survives". "The other" can't be anyone but Harry or Voldemort because "Either must die at the hand of Pettigrew (or Neville) for neither can live while Pettigrew (/Neville) survives" doesn't make any sense. If Pettigrew/Neville can't survive, then why also must Harry or Voldemort die by his hand? It doesn't work. -C From kkearney at students.miami.edu Thu Nov 20 22:52:11 2003 From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 22:52:11 -0000 Subject: Snape referring to LV as "The Dark Lord" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85583 syndicateblue asked: > I believe in Book 5, during one of the occlumancy lessons, in his > anger Harry finally confronts Snape about him referring to LV > as "The Dark Lord." He asks him why Snape still refers to LV > as "The Dark Lord," since the only people that ever call him that > are Death Eaters. Right when Snape is about to answer, they hear a > sudden crashing and screaming upstairs (I think the firing of > Trelawney) and Snape runs off, leaving Harry with the Pensieve. > Could the answer that Snape was about to give have any significance > to the plot? Sera replied: > But if you don't think Trelawney is a DE, how can you say that only > DEs call him the "Dark Lord"? She does. and Hickengruendler commented: > But Trelawney was possesed. It might not be herself, who spoke the > predictions. However, I don't know why Harry thinks, that only DE > call him "The Dark Lord". Fudge called him so, and as far as we (and > Harry) know, he isn't a Death Eater. Even Ernie MacMillan said "Dark > Lord". Several characters have used the term once or twice, but only Death Eaters seem to use it exclusively. It seems to be the name that Voldemort prefers his followers to use. I agree that we can't rely on Trelawny as evidence, since it seems that Seers are speaking from a neutral perspective when prophesizing. As for Snape's use of "the Dark Lord", I don't believe it indicates any support of Voldemort, at least not currently. I believe he does it for three reasons. First, habit. He would naturally have referred to Voldemort with this term while a Death Eater. Dumbledore is big on emphasizing that one must not be afraid of a name, so Snape really doesn't have any motivation to change his habits. Second, safety. He is still playing the part of Loyal Death Eater a few days a week. If he were to start calling Voldemort by one of his other nicknames, or even worse by the name Voldemort, it would increase the chance that he might slip up while in the presence of DEs or Voldemort himself. Better to avoid that hazard. Finally, it's not in Snape's character to admit openly that he was wrong. I think changing to more acceptable Voldemort references would be like admitting he had made a horrible mistake by following Voldemort in the first place, and that he was now willing to follow the better judgement of others. Of course, he does feel this way (assuming for the moment that he isn't still a DE; leave that debate for another day), but he is not about to admit it to the world. So overall, I believe Snape's interrupted answer was simply a way to keep his true character a secret for a little longer. -Corinth From MadameSSnape at aol.com Thu Nov 20 22:56:44 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 17:56:44 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) Message-ID: <1e3.13e4aa9b.2ceea0ac@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85584 In a message dated 11/20/2003 10:58:19 AM Eastern Standard Time, belijako at online.no writes: Tom wrote: JKR also said that Snape will fall in love at some point. Me: I'm sorry, but this information is completely new to me. Does anyone know the exact wording? I've never heard about this "Rowling-canon". Berit ************************** Sherrie: IMHO, this is a misreading of her comments on NPR's "The Connection" back in October of '99. If anyone has a transcript, they might want to post the link - the recording of the interview can be found http://archives.theconnection.org/archive/1999/10/1012b.shtml . The comments on Snape start a little more than 18 minutes into the recording, IIRC. Basically, she is asked if Snape will fall in love, or has ever been in love (it's been a while) - her response was "Who'd want Snape in love with them?", and seemed completely flummoxed that someone would ask such a question. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 23:00:41 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:00:41 -0000 Subject: Mister Figg...? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85585 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sylviablundell2001" wrote: > Apologies, Carol, for snipping your post too heavily. I only wanted > to answer the question of what name Mrs (?) Figg gives in court. > Otherwise we are in perfect accord! > Sylvia (who feels that, given the way the MoM seems to function, it > might be an advantage not to be known to them!) Good point! If I ever have to testify at a hearing in the MoM, I'll be sure to conceal my maiden name. ;-) Carol From yolandacarroll at yahoo.com Thu Nov 20 23:08:50 2003 From: yolandacarroll at yahoo.com (yolandacarroll) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:08:50 -0000 Subject: Stellar Brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85586 Aannemehr wrote: > Annemehr: > Actually, it seems pretty certain that you *don't* get to chose your > animagus form. While I like the idea of animagus *not* being able to choose their form, if you can't choose your form, then how would James, Sirius and Peter have known their plan would work? They could have wasted a lot of time and energy just to become animals that would not have suited their needs. I understand that werewolves are dangerous to humans not other animals, so that part would work regardless, however how did they know that two of them would be "large" enough to "keep a werewolf in check" and that one would be small enough to "slip beneath the Willow's attacking branches and touch the knot that freezes it." One answer I came up with is that through the process of becoming an animagus, they must have gotten an idea of what kind of animal they would be. The other is that they decided to become animagi not knowing exactly what would happen, but determined to try *something* to help Lupin. The idea of James, Sirius, and Peter doing the later would go a long way toward justifying Lupin's reluctance to betray their trust in POA. Yolanda From templerichmond at earthlink.net Thu Nov 20 23:24:58 2003 From: templerichmond at earthlink.net (canismajorette) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:24:58 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85587 Don't we hear in the first few pages that Sirius has lately been in Tibet? Do I recall that correctly? Then, it seems, no more is made of this, if I recall correctly. Now isn't that sort of a conspicuously odd detail? Should we expect this theme to resurface at some point? What with the mysticism associated with the Tibetan region, this could have profound implications. Before China seized this area, it was rife with not just standard Buddhism, but also many indigenous forms of magical practice. Many are the stories about westerners who have gone there for instruction in extraordinary doctrines and rigorous spiritual disciplines. It is said that in the most inaccessible heights of the Tibetan Himalays live immortal spiritual beings, called the Rishis by Vedic tradition, and the Planetary Hierarchy by modern western esotericism. Again, I think it is not just a throw-away line that JKR alludes to Tibet, since it is such a potent source of spiritual knowledge. From templerichmond at earthlink.net Thu Nov 20 23:38:33 2003 From: templerichmond at earthlink.net (canismajorette) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:38:33 -0000 Subject: Stellar Brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85588 I again pose the question of what it may mean that the Black brothers are named for powerful and revered stars, each with their own well developed star lore. What may be implied by each name, and the consequent relationship? Canis Majorette From IrishMastermind at hotmail.com Thu Nov 20 23:57:42 2003 From: IrishMastermind at hotmail.com (Anne Geldermann) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 18:57:42 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Case for Lupin Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85589 Anne Geldermann wrote: So what is to stop Lupin, if he is evil, from trying to grab Harry a split second too slowly and losing his grip as Harry hurtled by? Harry was fighting as hard as he could to get to the dais. All ESE!Lupin would then have to do would act incredibly horrified and guilty. Silmariel: >The question here is why would ESE!Lupin wanted Harry to live? > >I've got a simple answer: he needs Harry alive to kill Voldemort. >Harry will not be disposable until Voldie is out of the picture. > >So he never intended to kill him and only had to check if he could >fire Sirius. >And he was with Malfoy all the time. Both of them could have reasons >to kill Sirius, separatedly or together. Me again: Even so, there were several people in that room, and the other battles were finished or winding down. Sirius and Bellatrix were in a very prominent spot. There would have been much easier and much safer ways to get rid of Sirius, since the other people in the room could change where they were looking as quickly as Lupin could. And who was with Malfoy all the time? Lupin? I missed the part where they were with eachother all the time. And what reason could Lucius have for wanting Sirius dead? Just out of disgust for a blood-traitor? And if Lupin wanted Sirius dead, he could have handed him over to the dementors in POA. Anne _________________________________________________________________ >From the hottest toys to tips on keeping fit this winter, youll find a range of helpful holiday info here. http://special.msn.com/network/happyholidays.armx From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 00:19:59 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 00:19:59 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85590 Yolanda wrote: > Along the lines of Harry being the jinx on the DADA teachers, we > don't know how long Quirrell taught DADA, before PS/SS, however I > suspect it was for at least couple of school years, because Hagrid > said Quirrell was fine "while he was teaching out of books", then he > left to get some experience defending DADA. > > So Quirrell must have taught for a year at least, left to get some > experience, maybe during the summer, then returned to teach another > year. I say he returned to teach another year, because Hagrid > comments on Quirrell's change sound like they are about the past year > (or years). > > I think Quirrell was there at Hogwarts for at least two years before > Harry. This means of course that Quirrell actually had the job for > more than a year, so the jinx hadn't started yet. If it's any help, Voldemort says in GoF that he met Quirrell "four years ago" in Albania (Am. ed. 654) and that Quirrell ("young, foolish, and gullible") was a Hogwarts teacher at the time. Harry is just ending his fourth year at Hogwarts in that scene, so the meeting must have occurred in the summer of the year he entered Hogwarts, some time around his eleventh birthday. It's possible that Quirrell has just been hired, but it sounds as if he's already been teaching there for at least a year. I don't remember that specific Hagrid quote(page number, anybody?), but I do remember reading that Quirrell didn't stammer until his supposed encounter with a vampire (not so very far from the truth considering that Voldemort is a sort of spiritual vampire or parasite), which also suggests that he was teaching at Hogwarts for at least a year before the Voldemort encounter. That would mean he was teaching for at least two years, so the jinx could not have been in effect. It's even possible that he had been there as long as Snape, who is also relatively young (32 or 33 in SS/PS, about 21 when he started teaching). Quirrell could have started teaching at, say, 19, which would make him about 30 when Voldemort found him. My impression is that he's younger, though: "young, foolish, and gullible" suggests early rather than late twenties or early thirties. Still, if he did have the DADA position all those years, then his death would have begun the jinx. That certainly makes more sense than having Snape create the jinx and would explain why he kept applying for it against the much less-qualified Quirrell. Does anyone know when we first hear the suggestion that the position is jinxed? Could he be its first victim and/or its originator? Carol From kcawte at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 21 08:22:21 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 00:22:21 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Case for Lupin References: Message-ID: <001d01c3b008$95c92440$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 85591 Anne And what reason could Lucius have for > wanting Sirius dead? Just out of disgust for a blood-traitor? And if Lupin > wanted Sirius dead, he could have handed him over to the dementors in POA. > > > K Well he's not just a blood-traitor is he? He's *family*! By marriage only, but still family. Assuming Narcissa holds the same beliefs as Bellatrix and not Andromeda she must absolutely *hate* that not only is he a traitor, but he's now out of prison and sole possessor of the family home (and money possibly). I suspect she was doing a little dance of joy when she found out he was dead (although bearing in mind her husband ended up in jail at the same time, possibly not) K From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 00:30:40 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 00:30:40 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85592 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "canismajorette" wrote: > Don't we hear in the first few pages that Sirius has lately been in > Tibet? Do I recall that correctly? Then, it seems, no more is made of > this, if I recall correctly. Now isn't that sort of a conspicuously > odd detail? Should we expect this theme to resurface at some point? > > ...edited.. > > Again, I think it is not just a throw-away line that JKR alludes to > Tibet, since it is such a potent source of spiritual knowledge. > > canismajorette bboy_mn: The reference to Sirius being in Tibet came from Kingsly Shacklbolt, the Auror in charge of finding Sirius. But Kingsly knows that Sirius is indeed living in his old family home in London. So, to keep the rest of the Ministy off guard, he say that Sirius is rumored to be in Tibet which is a long way away, and in an area where he doesn't pose any immediate danger to the UK wizard world. However, in previous books we know that Sirius was in hiding outside of the UK, and was sending messages using huge colorfull tropical birds. My best guess for that would have been Mylasia and Thailand, or possibly central Africa. I don't know enough about the geography and ecology of Tibet to know if tropcial birds exist there. So I guess it might be possible that Sirius was hiding in this region in the past. But the reference is OoP is a false clue to keep the Ministry believing the Sirius in no where nearby and that he is not an immediate threat. Just a thought. bboy_mn Just a thought. bboy_mn From suzchiles at msn.com Thu Nov 13 15:33:25 2003 From: suzchiles at msn.com (Suzanne Chiles) Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 07:33:25 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Lily's and James' Parents References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85593 > Jennifer: > > Do we know that Lily's parents were muggles? In some discussions > a few weeks ago, we were surmising the magical possiblities of Dudley > and Petunia. Some people believe that Lily is trying to squash the > magic out of Dudley because Lily wouldn't be able to stand her own > flesh and blood as a wizard, something she hates more than anything > else. But I believe that Petunia is a wizard, rather want-to-be- > wizard. Personally, I think that Petunia is a squib and that her > family was a modest wizarding family way back. I tend to agree with you, for the most part, Jennifer. I have suspected for a while that one Lily and Petunia's grandparents were squibs. The first squib generation may have lived a fairly wizard-type life, similar to Mrs. Figg or Filch. The second generation (Lily's parents) likely lived a more muggle-type life, the type of life that Petunia saw as "right" and "normal." Suzanne From erinellii at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 00:56:27 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 00:56:27 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85594 "justcarol67" wrote: > > Does anyone know when we first hear the suggestion that the position > is jinxed? Could he be its first victim and/or its originator? > > Carol The first time we here it is in book two, when Hagrid says something like (paraphrasing, cause I'm without my books) "He (Lockhart) was the only one for the job. The only one. People are starting to think it's cursed. No one has lasted awhile now." So Quirrell couldn't have been the first one. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 01:20:48 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:20:48 -0000 Subject: - Rabastan (was: The Gang of Slytherins) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85596 > > Carol wrote: > > > > *snip* > > >(I'm still wondering about his brother Rabastan, mentioned > > >in another post. Anyone for an analysis of that name and its > > > possible significance?) > > > > Katrina responds: > > > > While I could find nothing on "Rabastan," a quick search through > the > > astronomy sites for "Rastaban" turned up some very interesting > > information. According to > > http://www.winshop.com.au/annew/Alwaid.html > > Rastaban is another name for the star Beta Draconis. It also > > says, "The Arabic name for Rastaban or Alwaid is Ra's ath-Thu'ban > > (1), 'Head of the snake'. Raso tabbani was a variation. > > > > [Hebrew name Rastaban, means the Head of the Subtle (serpent). In > > the Arabic it is still called Al Waid, which means, 'who is to be > > destroyed.'" > > Then it lists traditions and beliefs associated with the star as > > follows: > > > > > I did go Hmm, but I have another theory (don't we always). Rabastan is > no more a common name than Rastaban, so why should JKR corrupt the > star name to create it? Surely the pure-bloods care about spelling? > Moreover his brother Rodolphus does not have a star name, and the > pure-bloods do name their families in sets, whether the astronomically > fixated Blacks, or the old-fashioned-feeling Weasleys. So I submit a > theory for Rabastan itself, that links the brothers, and justifies the > meaning (I hope). > > Rodolphus comes from Rudolf, which combines the Germanic elements hrod > "fame," or "counsel" and wulf "wolf." Rabastan as his brother shares > the hrod through Rab-, a corruption of Rob- (as in the Scottish > nickname Rab for Robert), followed by the English/Germanic stan , > "stone." This would fit Rodolphus as the thinner, nervy-looking man, > and Rabastan as more solid and thickset, a bit less sparky than his > brother, not getting the girl and as the Fourth Man enduring years of > speculation over his identity in the Pensieve Trial. OTOH, maybe his name really is Rastaban, and Rabastan is just an uncaught typo? The Lexicon lists the name as Rastaban, which indicates that it's spelled that way somewhere in the series: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/azkaban.html At first I thought I had misspelled the name, but my copy of OoP definitely says Rabastan (Am. ed. 788). He isn't named in the Pensieve scene you mention but as you say, he's either the "thickset man who stared blankly up at Mr. Crouch" or "the thinner, more nervous-looking man, whose eyes were darting around the crowd" (Am. ed. 594). For some reason I'm leaning toward the second description--maybe because it's more interesting. I think only a dull-witted man would have married dear Bella. (No evidence, only a hunch.) I'm also curious as to why Voldemort skips over him when he mentions the Lestranges. The space where he pauses to mention them is only wide enough for two people, not three (GoF 650 Am. ed.) Does anyone know of any other place where he's named? Is he actually called Rastaban somewhere in the series? Maybe it would be mentioned in relation to the Longbottoms and the Cruciatus curse? Steve, can you help us out, please? Thanks, Carol From nineve_laguna at hotmail.com Fri Nov 21 01:37:06 2003 From: nineve_laguna at hotmail.com (nineve_laguna) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:37:06 -0000 Subject: Quidditch commentator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85597 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > fuzzlebub85 wrote: > > > Yes! New Quidditch commentator! I hope it's Hermione... > > "Ron Weasley saves another goal! I see he's balancing Quidditch > practice with > > homework quite well lately...and Harry Potter catches the snitch! > Well done, > > 150 points for Gryffindor! Gryffindor wins! Macmillan and Abbott > are > > disappointed..." > > Me: > > Hermione would be an interesting new installment... :-) The only > problem with her is that she isn't really that interested in > Quidditch so she might have problems commenting on what she sees. Or > maybe not :-) ******** Hermione is clever and really well spoken for comentator, but she doesn't have a clue about Quidditch, she is quite new to it as well. I am sure she could study it and know a lot about it, but she needs both her hands free to save Harry if he's jinxed again. My vote is on Ernnie Macmilan, because he has a very posh accent and is well spoken and articulate. Also, he is a Hufflepuff, so he would take sides to Griffindor when they play Slytherin. Nineve > > Berit From kelleythompson at gbronline.com Fri Nov 21 02:06:01 2003 From: kelleythompson at gbronline.com (Kelley) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 02:06:01 -0000 Subject: ADMIN: Announcing HPFGU-Feedback (repost) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85599 Sorry for the repost, everyone; the link wasn't working properly in the first message. Hello, Fellow Listmembers! We have a long-standing rule in HPFGU of not discussing list policy on the public lists. We've asked this of our members for a variety of reasons, and the lack of onlist policy debates has been appreciated by many members. However, we have also had feedback from some of you that you would like, at times, to be able to discuss list policy in an open forum, rather than simply sending messages to the -Owner address. The List Admin Team has also found the current system to be less than satisfactory, so we have come up with a new way for list members and list admnistration to come together and discuss matters of list policy in a friendly and constructive manner. We have created a new list, called HPFGU-Feedback. It is a forum for members of the HPFGU lists to comment, question, suggest, and discuss matters of list administration with each other and members of the List Admin Team. As this is a totally new feedback system, we are going to run it for a one-month trial period, from 20 November, to 19 December, 2003. To join, please go to http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback/ . If you wish to participate, please make sure to read the messages that are sent to your e-mail address upon subscribing to the list, as all members are required to send an acknowledgement that they have read, and agree to follow, the list's Ground Rules before taking part in discussion. We look forward to hearing what you have to say! :-) Hebby Elf From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 02:09:46 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 02:09:46 -0000 Subject: - Rabastan (was: The Gang of Slytherins) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85600 Carol wrote: *snip*(I'm still wondering about his brother Rabastan, mentioned in another post. Anyone for an analysis of that name and its possible significance?) Katrina responds: While I could find nothing on "Rabastan," a quick search through the astronomy sites for "Rastaban" turned up some very interesting information. Catherine: Rabastan is no more a common name than Rastaban, so why should JKR corrupt the star name to create it? Surely the pure-bloods care about spelling? Moreover his brother Rodolphus does not have a star name, and the pure-bloods do name their families in sets, whether the astronomically fixated Blacks, or the old-fashioned-feeling Weasleys. So I submit a theory for Rabastan itself, that links the brothers, and justifies the meaning (I hope). Carol: > OTOH, maybe his name really is Rastaban, and Rabastan is just an > uncaught typo? The Lexicon lists the name as Rastaban, which indicates > that it's spelled that way somewhere in the series: > > http://www.hp-lexicon.org/azkaban.html > > At first I thought I had misspelled the name, but my copy of OoP > definitely says Rabastan (Am. ed. 788). He isn't named in the Pensieve > scene you mention but as you say, he's either the "thickset man who > stared blankly up at Mr. Crouch" or "the thinner, more nervous-looking > man, whose eyes were darting around the crowd" (Am. ed. 594). For some > reason I'm leaning toward the second description--maybe because it's > more interesting. I think only a dull-witted man would have married > dear Bella. (No evidence, only a hunch.) I'm also curious as to why > Voldemort skips over him when he mentions the Lestranges. The space > where he pauses to mention them is only wide enough for two people, > not three (GoF 650 Am. ed.) > > Does anyone know of any other place where he's named? Is he actually > called Rastaban somewhere in the series? Maybe it would be mentioned > in relation to the Longbottoms and the Cruciatus curse? > > Steve, can you help us out, please? > > Thanks, > Carol In response to my own post, he's also Rabastan on OoP 114 (Am. ed.), where Sirius talks about the Lestranges being put in Azkaban with Barty Crouch, Jr. So that lets out my typo theory. OTOH, Rabastan could still be a corruption of Rastaban, tying in with the astronomical names of the Blacks. That makes about as much sense as giving him and his brother Germanic first names to go with their French last name. But on the basis of the evidence, I have to agree with Catherine even though Katrina's theory is more intriguing. Sigh! There's still the question of what he's doing in the book and why there are so many pairs of brothers (Albus and Aberforth, Regulus and Sirius, Rodolphus and Rabastan), all with more or less matching names but in some cases, contrasting personalities. (I'm waiting now for Lupin's brother, Romulus.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 02:56:47 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 02:56:47 -0000 Subject: Were we right? New characters? In-Reply-To: <97.40d9a8f6.2cecc967@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85601 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, kewiromeo at a... wrote: > I mean seriously guys, look at all the predictions we made after book 4. How > many things were we actualy right about? I made some of the most amazing and > logical predictions but she completely steered me off course. Everything came > out of nowhere. > > Do you think that she is going to introduce even more characters? Those just > really ruined our predictions. I think that they have enough characters and > the story has been so established that she can barely possibly introduce people > we don't know. I don't mean bringing back characters with trivial positions, I > mean bringing us another Tonks or Umbridge. > > What do you guys/gals think? > > Tzvi of Brooklyn We're almost certainly going to meet Mark Evans, and if Harry is at the Sorting ceremony we'll at least hear the names of other first-years. Since the DADA position has to be filled and I don't think DD is ready to let Snape have it quite yet, there'll be at least one new teacher. If the Trio take any new subjects, there may be other new teachers as well (some of whom may have been named but haven't appeared as characters yet). Someone mentioned new Quidditch players. They don't necessarily have to be characters whose names we haven't heard yet but they'll be new characters in the sense that we don't know them yet. I expect that we'll hear more from other people we've barely glimpsed: Dennis Creavey, Theodore Nott, Narcissa Malfoy, surviving members of the Order of the Phoenix (including the Longbottoms and possibly Aberforth), Neville's gran, Trevor--oops, he's not a person. I think having been turned into a tadpole in Snape's hand rules out his being an animagus. I'm pretty sure we'll learn more about the DEs, too. (Who the heck is Jugson?) And maybe we'll see more of Fleur de la Court and Viktor Krum. I do hope JKR doesn't run short of characters. So few to work with here. Carol From JPWilko at jwilkinson18.freeserve.co.uk Fri Nov 21 01:52:14 2003 From: JPWilko at jwilkinson18.freeserve.co.uk (John) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:52:14 -0000 Subject: Voldemorts next move Message-ID: <000c01c3afd2$3650be00$eb6509d4@John> No: HPFGUIDX 85602 Exposed with half his group lock up, what is You Know Who going to do next. The first step would (logically?!?) be to regroup and form (yet another) plan. He prefers to spread disorder rather than be on the defensive. But would the Dark Lord want them back? Other than the sadistic pleasure of letting his follows pay for their failure, when they eventually return they will be wand less wrecks. Exposed for the loyalty to the Dark Lord, there positions in society and abilities to influence would be gone. This is something the Dark Lord will truly miss. For example, he can no longer send Lucus Malfoy to 'spy' on the promise to make a donation. Also, where would they get replacement wands? None of the group could go along to Diagon Alley and place an order for 5 or so new wands, let alone about the cost. I doubt anything would have stopped the gallant Fudge impounding assets. Just imagine the wonderful image of Draco Malfoy being poor. No big house. No new broom. No house elf (assuming the got a replacement). Rons' favourite dream! This does lead me on to thinking what will be Voldemort medium to long-term objectives. What is he aiming for? Will he be able to dismiss Harry Potter and work around the problem of not hearing the prophecy? Or will he dwell in his constant defeats that probably (book 7) will lead to his own ultimate destruction. John From ptcruisingjoe at hotmail.com Fri Nov 21 02:30:49 2003 From: ptcruisingjoe at hotmail.com (Joey Zarek) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 21:30:49 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: Announcing HPFGU-Feedback (repost) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85603 Thanks for the email! _________________________________________________________________ Share holiday photos without swamping your Inbox. Get MSN Extra Storage now! http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 03:20:41 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 03:20:41 -0000 Subject: Neville's Gran In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85604 > > Joj: > > At first, I was wondering how a wand could be "weak", as you said. I > mean, it can't just be because it's not Neville's own wand. As people > keep saying, Ron's new wand didn't improve his results dramatically. > > (Aside question though, as I don't have my books here : does it say > whether Ron's new wand was bought at Ollivander's, or could it have > been bought in a second-hand shop ? In that case, it wouldn't be any > better for Ron than having Charlie's wand - or was it Bill's ?) > I don't think we've really looked closely into the results from Ron's new wand. Obviously it works better than the broken one, which backfired to make him eat slugs and to wipe out Lockhart's memory. I think JKR just takes the new wand for granted. Does Ron have problems with his used wand in SS/PS, before it's broken? (Movie contamination here--I can see him turning Scabbers into a furry cup with a tail. Does something like that happen in the book, and if so is it in PS?SS or CS?) Anyway, just because Ron doesn't say, "Oh! I'm so happy to have my own wand!" doesn't mean that the new wand doesn't suit him better than the old one. It's like a new pair of shoes. If they pinch your feet, you notice them. If they fit, you take them for granted. I think that's what's happening here. Ron's new wand works fine. He's stopped wreaking havoc. Why mention it? Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 03:33:52 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 03:33:52 -0000 Subject: Percy vs Sirus Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85605 > Nikki wrote: > > My question is this is there any connection in Percy, who has > obviously > > gone bad in OoP being from a good family, and Sirus who is good > being > > from a bad family? Is this JKR's way of irony or is there something > > underlying in these two comparisons, maybe that Love is not the > root > > of all but friends and colleagues? > Mandy wrote: > I think more than just irony although that is part of it. It's also > part of JKR way of reminding us adults and teaching children that not > everything we see is black or white. Good or Bad. Gryiffindor or > Slytherin. Harry or Draco. Etc. There is so much gray that life can > be very difficult and challenging and all our decisions have > consequences that affect others. What's important is to believe in > yourself, as Percy does, but even than you must always respect those > who love and care for you. I agree that Percy is a "gray" character, but I can't agree that his "belief in himself" is in anyway good. Percy's vanity and pride, along with his blind obedience to authority and his faith in the MoM, has brought grief to his family and nearly resulted in disaster for himself. He can even be held partially to blame for Crouch Sr.'s death because he didn't figure out that something was very wrong with his beloved boss. Though I do like him and hope I'm wrong that he's going to die in Book 6 or 7, Percy is not at this point an admirable character. He's made a lot of stupid blunders, he's hurt the family who loves him, and he's idolized the wtong people. One of two things has to happen now. Either he'll come around and redeem himself, or he'll stay on his course of blind hero worship and vanity and come to ruin. Maybe both will happen and he'll die redeemed. I hope so, for Molly's sake, but I don't think it's going to happen. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 04:20:43 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 04:20:43 -0000 Subject: Percy Weasley under Lucius' Imperius Curse? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85606 > > Rebecca: > > Yes, but he was *trying* to act professional. He's > > offering tea and trying to impress the boss. But he > > isn't scanning the news that'll send his old > > headmaster to jail "joyfully." He's just trying to > > impress the boss. > > > > It doesn't seem the same to me. > > > Erin > "Just trying to impress the boss" is exactly what he's doing in OoP > also... but Fudge is impressed by different things than Crouch. And, > IMO, sitting in his seat casting sulking, jealous looks at Harry is > not trying to act professionaly. More like childishly. > > I think its reasonable from Percy's viewpoint that he tries even > harder to win Fudge's approval in OoP. After all, he's cast off his > family, so the way he sees it, Fudges approval is the only approval > he's going to be getting from now on. And Percy is someone who needs > approval very badly. > > Erin I'm not sure who I agree with here because so much of the thread has been snipped, but the Percy of OoP is definitely different from the BigHeadedBoy of PoA and the eager junior assistant of GoF, "Weatherby." In GoF, he puts up with the twins' taunts and apparently likes his family even though they don't understand him. He even sets aside his beloved cauldron reports to attend the World Quidditch Cup with his family. Later, he watches the Tri-Wizard Tournament with great interest and judges the events fairly, giving Harry the scores he deserves and taking into account things like "moral fiber" in the second event. At that same event he's white with fear that Ron has drowned (GoF Am. ed. 504) and embarrasses Ron by hugging him in front of the whole school ("Madam Pomfrey had gone to rescue Ron from Percy's clutches," GoF Am. ed. 505). But he's not allowed to judge the third event and he faces an investigation after Mr. Crouch's death. Maybe he expected his family to stand by him and they didn't, but in any case when he see him again in OoP he's a different Percy. He's repudiated his family (the sweater and the fight) and he stands by Fudge's side eagerly scribbling notes as Fudge gleefully decides to try to arrest Dumbledore rather than expelling Harry. I don't think he's under an Imperius curse (though maybe Fudge is). I think he's just let his "prat" side win out over his devotion to his family, who haven't shown the pride in him he thinks he's earned. He's badly in need of guidance, but he's not going to find it at the MoM. And as I keep saying, he'd better shape up or something bad will happen. Pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall. Carol From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Fri Nov 21 04:25:19 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:25:19 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville's Gran References: Message-ID: <000601c3afe7$78b80d60$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85607 Carol: >I don't think we've really looked closely into the results from Ron's new wand. Obviously it works better than the broken one, which backfired to make him eat slugs and to wipe out Lockhart's memory. I think JKR just takes the new wand for granted. Does Ron have problems with his used wand in SS/PS, before it's broken? (Movie contamination here--I can see him turning Scabbers into a furry cup with a tail. Does something like that happen in the book, and if so is it in PS?SS or CS?) Anyway, just because Ron doesn't say, "Oh! I'm so happy to have my own wand!" doesn't mean that the new wand doesn't suit him better than the old one. It's like a new pair of shoes. If they pinch your feet, you notice them. If they fit, you take them for granted. I think that's what's happening here. Ron's new wand works fine. He's stopped wreaking havoc. Why mention it? Joj : That's true, but I was trying to point out the differences in the reasons why both wands were broken in the first place. Ron's wand broke to serve the plot. It was kind of a running gag, until the real purpose was revealed at the end. It rebounded the memory charm back onto Lockhart. Not a humongous plot point, but certainly the reason JKR wrote Ron's wand being broken. Which brings us to Neille. There was no purpose served by his wand being broken. The importance of it happening, therefore, must come in the replacing of that wand. There must be either an improvement with the new wand, or we find out something about the old wand or if Gran will "kill him" for breaking it. It just seems very significant to me. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 04:59:35 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 04:59:35 -0000 Subject: Ginny Weasley's Birthday In-Reply-To: <20031119202908.77789.qmail@web25104.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85608 > Udder Pendragon wrote: > > Hi all, > I posted this question a week or so ago strait into a server problem so here go's again. > > Does any one out there have any idea when Ginny Weasley's birthday is? I have been trying to find it but with no luck. > > We seem to know when all the other main character's Birthdays are why not Ginny's. > > Or could this lack of knowledge be significant? > > Udder Pendragon I don't think any of the birthdays is particularly significant except Harry's, which is exactly three months before the anniversary of his parents' death (Halloween). JKR has Hermione mention casually in Book 4 or 5 that her birthday is in September (hence the question of whether she's two months younger or ten months older than Harry), but we only know the exact date (September 19) from interviews in which fans asked the question. We know that Ron's is March 1 for the same reason. We know that the twins were born in April, which is important only because that makes them about six months too young to enter the Tri-Wizard Tournament. We don't know Ginny's birthday simply because the question hasn't come up. Let's hope it's not October 31. Carol From AllieS426 at aol.com Fri Nov 21 05:27:32 2003 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 05:27:32 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85609 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zihav" wrote: > Greeting: ((snipped)) > > > As the subject line says I think Narcissa is the ture spy for the > Order and Snape is only the go between. Snape can't possibly go back to the Death Eaters he would be killed right away. > > > In GoF when we first meet her she has a look of something bad > smelling right under her nose. What if she hates her husband, but > can't leave without leaving her son behind which she wouldn't do. > > She hates what her husband becasue what he has done to her son > (making him a second generation DE) and wants to protect him from > that life of going no where. > > She's the one who prevented Draco from going to Drumstrang. She's > always sending sweets and seems to be the one more concerned about > her son's welfare than the father. > ___________________ WOW! I really like that! I was wondering the other day how JKR could throw us for a loop *yet again* (Quirrell, Ginny, Scabbers as the "bad guy"- who'd suspect?), and I think it would either involve * writing in another complex character like Mad-Eye in GoF * fleshing out one of the minor characters like Tonks or Kingsley in some interesting way (because right now, I don't think we know the newer characters well enough to really be shocked by them, except maybe Luna) * using an existing noble character to betray the order (not Lupin, please not Lupin, I won't believe it's Lupin) Narcissa would be great for that! We've met her before, we know a bit about her, nobody has any doubt that she's evil (after all, she did marry Lucius and spawn Draco didn't she?). It would be perfect! I don't necessarily think it will happen, but what a clever idea! Allie From erinellii at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 05:28:08 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 05:28:08 -0000 Subject: TBAY: The Bill Weasley is Ever So Evil post (1 of 3) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85610 Eleven p.m. Erin, a relative newcomer to Theory Bay, is seated at the bar of the Royal George, her red hair shining in the candlelight as her long brown trench-coat brushes the side of the barstool. She gazes dreamily at the bartender. "You really *are* just as good-looking as everyone says, you know..." she remarks in a suspiciously slurred voice. "I think you've had enough for tonight." George says firmly. He looks around. The bar is very nearly deserted, only a sullen Avery sitting all alone in his corner, but then, it *is* a Thursday night. "Let me make sure you get back to your ship safely. The Imperius!Arthur trimaran, right?" Erin nods. As they make their way to the dock where Erin left her rowboat, George takes it upon himself to point out a few of the more interesting sights in Theory Bay. "There's the Canon Museum, the Safe House, the forest, Diana's castle complete with croquet.... Hey! Where are you going?!" Erin is heading towards a path which leads into the forest, stumbling only slightly as she walks. She stops in front of a large fir tree, which is missing several limbs toward the top. It almost looks as though the tree had undergone massive can(n)on fire sometime in the distant past. Under the tree sits a small gravestone marked: ESE!Sirius Black Hedgehog June 7, 2002 - June 21, 2003 Curiously, the dirt around in front of the grave looks to have been disturbed rather more recently. Erin prods it with her foot and looks an inquiry at George, who explains; "Kneasy was out here a few weeks ago trying to resurrect the poor thing. He didn't have much luck, though." "So, is this the tree I think it is?" Erin asks George. "The one where Elkins first spotted her Evil!McGonagall hedgehog?" "It is," George confirms. "Good. You know, I've never been able to believe in Evil!McGonagall, but I think this tree is historically appropriate for my own pet theory's debut. Yes, I've finally finished it, which is what I was celebrating back there in the bar. And I want you to be my witness, George." So saying, Erin reaches under her trenchcoat and withdraws a BB GUN. George flinches. "You aren't another nutter like Captain Cindy, are you?" he asks nervously. "If I was, would that be a safe question to ask?" Erin laughs. "Don't worry though, it's perfectly all right. This is only a BB GUN. You know, an acronym? It stands for Bitter Bill Goes Undeniably Nefarious." "Nefarious Bill, huh? As in Bill Weasley? What made you think of *that* one?" George asks, politely stifling a yawn. Although only a simple Snapetheory, George has been around for more theory debuts than he cares to remember. Seemed like nearly everyone in the Bay felt drawn to confide in the handsome bachelor bartender at one time or another. Still, he reflects, it's always best to feign interest when the lady carries a weapon. "I'm going to need a clear head for this," Erin says. Concentrating intently, she causes a small barrel of water to appear before her and plunges her head into it, emerging sputtering and stone cold sober. Drawing a deep breath, she prepares to theorize. "It all started," Erin begins, "with a conversation I overheard back in April, back when Abigail and Errol believed that Bill would be the main death in OoP. Here's some of what Errol said in post #55155: **************** "Ah, but none of them are as perfectly set up as our dear Bill. What function does Bill play in the narrative? He's just one of many "elder brother' figures--talk about redundancy and usurped roles. And his make up is startling similar to Cedric- excellant student, straightforward, handsome and well liked and has been conspicuously pushed into the forefront of activity. He's someone liked and respected by Harry, and the first of Harry's generation to actually qualify for being on the battlefront. Besides there are too many Weasleys- one definitely has to go. Why bring Bill into the story so much in GoF? He practically took a year off from Gringotts- or had an awful lot of traveling to do just to support Harry. Molly turning up at the tasks in lieu of Harry's family is understandable, but why not Arthur along with her? He's around in England isn't he? Or why not Charlie who's also over from Romania around the time of the tasks? Nope, it had to be Bill, untiringly dragged in all the way from Egypt. Smacks of a conscious agenda to me!!" **************** "I agreed with every word," continues Erin, "but it seemed to me that the author's agenda wasn't necessarily limited to death. That she could, in fact have *another* use in mind for Bill- as a traitor. A disposable bad guy. Which is actually a lot like dying, plot-wise. So I set out to look for evidence, and boy, did I ever find it." "The first thing that jumped out at me was the clothes. There is just something a little *off* about those rebellious rock-concert duds, something which doesn't quite match up with his ultra-responsible demeanor. Tell me, George," Erin said, whirling suddenly to face the bartender, "What do you think about Bill's clothes?" "I, uh, don't think about other guys' clothes all that much," said George, idly eyeing Erin up and down, but finding his gaze thwarted by the bulky trenchcoat. "But Abigail once thought they might mean he was gay. Of course, he's dating Fleur Delacour now, so I guess that's out. So let me think... he has an earring, right?" ********* > He was wearing an earring with what looked like a fang dangling >from it. *********GoF, Ch. 5 "That's the canon," says Erin. "I actually have a bit more to say about Bill's clothing, but it will keep. We can to move on to the earring first. Do you remember that Molly didn't like it?" *********** > In the middle of the table, Mrs. Weasley was arguing with Bill >about his earring, which seemed to be a recent acquisition. > "... with a horrible great fang on it. Really, Bill, what do they >say at the bank?" > "Mum, no one at the bank gives a damn how I dress as long as I >bring home plenty of treasure." said Bill patiently. ************GoF, Ch. 5 "Why do you think Bill was wearing that earring to dinner when it bothered Molly so much?" asks Erin. "Well, it was new," offers George, "so maybe he didn't realize it would bug her." "No, I don't buy that. She's his mother. He's grown up with her, and you can't tell me he isn't aware of what she considers proper attire for her sons. He *knows* she's going to be bothered, and yet he wears it anyway. To a simple family dinner. It's not as if there are any girls or any of his friends there that he wants to impress. Nope, just his family and Ron's little friends. "So why is he wearing the earring? He's wearing it BECAUSE it bugs his mother. He *wants* to irritate her. He's practically begging to be confronted about it. There are some serious Issues lurking here. "And you know what else disturbs me, George? That 'damn'. 'No one at the bank gives a damn how I dress...' Bill is swearing at his mother. We've never seen any other member of the Weasley family do this. If you had asked me which of the family would be most likely to, I'd have said the twins. After all, they were pretty sorely provoked the summer of GoF, when Mrs. Weasley threw away all their Weasley's Wizarding Wheezes candies. But no. They get angry, they shout at her, but they don't curse. Because even as angry as they are, they know that would not be tolerated. "Sure, there are some families, like the Osbournes, where swearing is commonplace and unremarkable. But the Weasleys are not one of those families. Molly wouldn't stand for it. This is made clear in GoF, Chapter 9: ***************** >Ron told Malfoy to do something that Harry knew he would never have >dared say in front of Mrs. Weasley. ****************** "Bill is older, though," points out George, "so maybe he can say what he likes without Molly correcting him." "Age didn't seem to make that much difference to her in OoP, when she's determined to keep the twins, who are now of legal age, out of the know during Harry's question and answer session. And look at how she dotes on Percy in GoF, defending him from the twins even after he's gone all adult and gotten a real job. And the way she tells Arthur right before the QWC that she'll "send along" Bill, Charlie, and Percy around midday, as if they're not capable of deciding a sensible time to leave by themselves. No, Molly doesn't treat her grown-up children as adults. She treats them as her children, same as she always has. "So what's different about Bill? Why does he swear in front of Mrs. Weasley? And why doesn't she call him on it? Does Bill perhaps have a temper? Maybe Mrs. Weasley is afraid to cross him- perhaps he's blown up at her on previous occasions and she doesn't want to provoke him now. Whatever the case, she ignores his baiting and immediately changes the subject to his hair." "Isn't all this behavior a little immature?" asks George. "Bill has been out of school, and presumably out of his parents' house, for at least five years at the beginning of GoF. We know he's had the Gringotts job in Egypt for at least 3 years. The very youngest he could be would be around 23, and he could be considerably older- even up to 30. If you go by the Lexicon, he was 27 that summer. That would mean he'd been of legal age for 10 years. So why does he still feel the need to rebel?" "For the same reason a teenager would---- because he doesn't feel in control of his life," Erin answers. "Let's look at Bill's clothes again- this time the whole quote: ************************* >"Bill was-- there was no other word for it-- *cool*. He was tall, >with long hair that he had tied back in a ponytail. He was wearing >an earring with what looked like a fang dangling from it. Bill's >clothes would not have looked out of place at a rock concert, except >that Harry recognized his boots to be made, not of leather, but of >dragon hide." *************************GoF, Ch. 5 "What kind of clothes do you think belong at a rock concert, George? What color would they be, for instance?" "With the earring and the long hair and the boots? I suppose they'd have to be black to really pull off that 'cool' look," George replied, his handsome brow furrowed with thought. "Black. Yes, that's exactly what *I* thought also. And when I picture Bill all dressed in black with his fang earring, long hair, and boots, I get this flashback to my high school days. I knew people like Bill! These would be the "Goths", the "alternative" people, the "Trenchcoat Mafia" types--the ones who listened to Marilyn Manson back when he was cool. If you had a poem to write in English class, theirs would always be about death. Often very smart people, but bitter. The very people who might think an Evil Overlord was Ever So Cool. Yes, I had tons of friends just like Bill. "The thing was, they grew out of it! I've been out of high school for six years now, and as we all went to work and college and life, the goth look just got old. We weren't mad at our parents any longer because we were in control of our own lives!" Erin says. "Um..." says George uncomfortably. "As a Snapetheory, I've never been to high school or experienced any of that growing up stuff. I guess you're trying to say that Bill hasn't grown up, hasn't gotten over his anger?" "That's right. It's not only left-over anger from his childhood. No, that earring was recently acquired. Whatever Bill's fashion statement means to him, it is something that he is still involved in and adding to. "And now, you're no doubt wondering what it is that has Bill feeling so out of control and angry? Well- what else? Lord Voldemort. Let me quote from PS/SS, Ch. 4: **************** >"--- but it's incredible yeh don't know his name, everyone in our world knows---" >"Who?" >"Well--- I don't like sayin' the name if I can help it. No one does." >"Why not?" >"Gulpin' Gargoyles, Harry, people are still scared." ***************** "Even ten years later, people are terrified to say the name. Think how truly bad it must have been while Bill was a young child, during his formative years, when Voldemort was taking over. All of Bill's life, the shadow of Lord Voldemort has been hanging over the WW." "So?" says George "That must be true for everyone who's Bill's age. Why does it affect Bill so particularly badly?" "For several reasons," says Erin. "Nymphadoraotonks says- no, not the real Tonks!" she exclaims in irritation as George opens his mouth, "she says in message 85375: '...Percy has seen what a life of 'doing right' can give. His father has, for the most part, always done the right thing. Arthur has always been on the right side, and yet it has afforded his family very little in luxury....' "Well, Percy isn't the only one who is hip to this dynamic. Ron, Fred, and George all resent being poor. And Bill sees the same thing. Do-gooding really *hasn't* afforded the Weasleys much in terms of wealth or rank or even personal safety. If anything, it's put them in the path of danger, earning the emnity of powerful wizarding families like the Malfoys. "And if you believe, as I do, in LAW CAMERA (Lovable Arthur Weasley Controlled And Manipulated by Evil Riddle Anagram), the Imperius! Arthur theory, then it only gets bleaker. It's even worse than that if you believe in the Missing Weasley Child. Bill has seen his family go through some horrible things. And he knows Voldemort is coming back someday. Heck, practically the whole wizarding world knows it: *************** >"Some say he died. Codswallop, in my opinion. Dunno if he had enough >human left in him to die. Some say he's still out there, biding his >time, like... ***************PS/SS, Ch. 4 "Sure, the Weasleys have Dumbledore's support, but will that really help them if Lord Voldemort decides to target them? Look what Hagrid says about that in the very first book: ************* >'Course, some stood up to him -- an' he killed 'em. Horribly. ***********PS/SS, Ch.4 "and: ********************** >No one ever lived after he decided ter kill 'em, no one except you, >an' he killed some o' the best witches an' wizards of the age.... ***********************PS/SS, Ch. 4 "So see there? No one ever escaped except Harry. Bill knows that being friends with Dumbledore won't save him if Lord Voldemort decides to kill him," says Erin grimly. "And Bill admits to being frightened when he's telling Ron about the Death Eaters at the Quidditch World Cup: ************************* >"...I bet they'd be EVEN MORE FRIGHTENED THAN THE REST OF US to see >him come back." (emphasis added) *************************GoF, Ch. 9 "So what does Bill do in this situation? Because he's a Gyffindor, he decides to face up to his problem. There's an old saying-- if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. And this is Evil!Bill's choice. "Not everyone has this option, you know. Hermione, for instance, has no choice but to fight Voldemort. Even if she wanted to join up, the Death Eaters wouldn't take her. And the same goes for all the other Muggle-borns. But Bill is from an old, pureblood wizarding family. He'll do very well in the Voldemort chain of command." George was looking uncomfortable. "Well?" says Erin sharply, "what's the matter? Don't you like my theory so far?" "It's just that, er, you've brought up some good characterization points, but what has your Evil!Bill actually *done* ? What makes him so evil? Elkins and Pippin have big long lists of the crimes ESE! McGonagall and Lupin supposedly committed. And don't even get me started on the Magic Dishwasher Defense Team (MDDT). They can go on all day about Dumbledore and his spies." "Oh, so you want the evidence I promised you at the beginning? Well, you have to keep in mind that ESE!Bill has only recently officially come over to the dark side, and that his most horrendous acts will be committed in future books. But I think that I can come up with a few tidbits," Erin smiles. "If you can stand just a wee bit more background first." To be continued.... --Erin (who would like to request that people answering this post try out the TBAY format. It doesn't have to be anything elaborate; just saying "so-and-so [your name and a brief description of your TBAY persona] popped in and said to Erin [then making the rest of your post like normal]" will do. Though if you want to get more detailed, that would be great! Go on, try it, it's fun! Thank you!) Notes on post references: Imperius!Arthur theory- messages 40168, 45290, and 77654 The Evil!Sirius hedgehog- message 39553 Kneasy's post- message 84133 Evil!McGonagall- message 39470 Evil!Lupin- message 39362 From AllieS426 at aol.com Fri Nov 21 05:43:17 2003 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 05:43:17 -0000 Subject: The trouble with Percy/poor Weasleys In-Reply-To: <1069358316.4333.77.camel@Bujold_RH> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85611 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Angel Moules wrote: > dmoorehpnc wrote: > > > > Didn't Percy remark about his father's chosen line of work and his "alliances" as the cause of the families money woes? > > He's not the only one who says it either. At the end of GoF Molly says that it's "Arthur's love of Muggles that has kept him back at the ministry all these years." When I read that, I said, "ohhhhh." Makes sense, doesn't it? Why hard-working, good-hearted, PURE- BLOODED (since that's so important to the ministry) Mr. Weasley doesn't make more money. And it's almost noble, he probably could have moved up in the ministry, but he loves his dear Muggles too much. He basically *IS* the Misuse of Muggle Artifacts office, isn't he? What would happen if he left? It's amazing none of his children resent the Muggles for it... Allie From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Fri Nov 21 06:19:38 2003 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 06:19:38 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85612 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katrina" wrote: > > > >Katrina wrote: > > > > I found no reference in > > > > SS/PS that Quirrel was killed. > > > > > JJPandy's wrote: > > I remember being unsure of Quirrel's fate until in book 5, > > > Harry and the gang were speculating on the new DADA teacher and > > Harry listed off the fates of the previous 4. It was something > > like "one dead (must be referring to Quirrel... > > > > Berit wrote: > > > > Here's a reference from CoS p. 216 British Version (Dumbledore's > > words to Harry): > > "He [Voldemort] left Quirrel to die; he shows just as little mercy > to > > his followers as his enemies." > > > > Katrina again: > > OK, but -as Geoff pointed out in #85494 - there's still no evidence > that *Harry* killed Quirrell. It could have been Dumbledore. It > could have been the shock of Voldemort leaving his body, for that > matter. It could have been the Unicorn blood catching up with him, > for all we know. Also, Voldemort himself said: "The servant died when I left his body, and I was left as weak as ever I had been," In GOF, in the graveyard scene, which seems to imply that one caused the other, though not definitively... --Arcum From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 07:13:49 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:13:49 -0000 Subject: Snape and the DADA job In-Reply-To: <20031119215536.52980.qmail@web60202.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85613 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, A Featheringstonehaugh wrote: > Perhaps Snape's desire for the DADA position and Dumbledore's refusal of it may all be a charade; the intended implication being that Dumbledore harbors some mistrust of Snape. > > AF > If that's the case, we have to consider Dumbledore untruthful since he's said about once every book, "I trust Severus Snape." The most obvious illustration of that trust is at the end of GoF, after Snape has very courageously revealed the mark on his arm to Idiot!Fudge, when Dumbledore sends Snape off on a clearly dangerous secret mission (my guess is that he has to present Lucius Malfoy with a plausible excuse for not attending the meeting of Death Eaters). Has anyone listed the number of times Dumbledore has said directly and openly, without Snape being present, that he trusts him? Surely (unles we believe in ESE!Dumbledore, which I don't) there's no reason to doubt his word. Carol From dfran at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 21 07:15:47 2003 From: dfran at sbcglobal.net (deedeee88) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:15:47 -0000 Subject: Ponderables... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85614 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sevenhundredandthirteen" wrote: > > deedeee88 pondered: > > >2. If only the heir of Slytherin could open the chamber of secrets > >how was Harry able to open the Chamber of Secrets??!? > > I reply: > > The book never actually says that only the heir of Slytherin could > *open* the Chamber of Secrets, only that they are the only ones who > could *unseal* the Chamber of Secrets. > > From CoS Chapter 9 `The Writing On The Wall.' > Spoken by Professor Binns: > > "Slytherin, according to the legend, sealed the Chamber of Secrets so > that none would be able to open it until his own true heir arrived at > the school. The heir alone would be able to unseal the Chamber of > Secrets, unleash the horror within, and use it to purge the school of > all who were unworthy to study magic." > > Note that we have the use of the words `seal' and `unseal.' The way I > see it, Slytherin sealed the Chamber 1000 years ago. Tom Riddle, his > true heir, unsealed it 50 years ago. But no-one has resealed it in > any way. That is, *anyone* can now walk on down into the Chamber of > Secrets (provided they speak Parseltongue or are with someone who > does). So, Harry didn't unseal the Chamber of Secrets (which is the > only task restricted to Slytherin's heir) it was already unsealed for > him. He just opened the door to it. DeeDee here: After OOP, what with DD saying that Mr. Riddle/Voldemort would mark his nemisis as his equal....how can anyone say that Harry just "reopened" the chamber??!???? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 07:23:14 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:23:14 -0000 Subject: Defending Ron WAS Re: Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85615 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "uilnslcoap" wrote: > > As for Hermione, I like her. Sure she is an arrogant, little swot. > > What teenage isn't arrogant at that age? I was. Hermione is not > > afraid to take on her firends and challenge them when it's > important, > > encourage them when they really need it and says no when they are > > wrong. Hermione is a far better friend than Ron could ever be to > > Harry, who is nothing more than a drinking buddy who agrees with > > everything Harry wants and does. Don't get me wrong we need all > need > > faithful friends like Ron, but it's those friends that let us > fester > > on the couch, (which is cool for about a day) when what we really > > need is a quick kick in the back side from the Hermione's of the > > world. We'd all be lucky to have a friend like Hermione. > > I like Hermione, too. But I feel compelled to shade Ron from the > sycophantic (I would even say boorish) light you paint him in. > > Ron often understands what Harry needs (or at least wants) better > than Hermione does. Look at how he brings up the idea that Harry > mayn't want to date Cho just after their kiss. I believe Hermione's > brain goes, "Harry's liked her awhile + They kissed = He wants to > date her." Ron sees that the workings of Harry's thoughts on the > subject might not be quite so simple and says so out loud. Hermione > gives better advice about girls, of course, but it's often Ron who > understands when it's pointless to pester Harry about something and > tells Hermione to let it go (which, to her credit, she sometimes does > take as the proper advice and which indicates that Hermione herself > believes Ron can be right about how to treat Harry). > > Look, also, at the suffering Harry undergoes, when Ron departs due to > their fight in GoF. That lack of emotional support is just as > harmful to him as the lack of Hermione's intellectual support (due to > petrification) in CoS for instance where Harry only puts it together > because he's lucky enough that Hermione's brain put it together > before she got incapacitated. He can't function too well without > either of them. > > Ron also has not been incapable of disagreeing with Harry in the > past. In OotP, he makes it clear that he doesn't believe Harry's > accomplishments of the past four years were worthless or all based on > luck even when Harry clearly starts to get angry. I'm sorry I can't > think of anymore right now, but I am certain if I had the books in > front of me, I could find several more. > > I just think it's harsh to say that Hermione's "a far better friend > than Ron could ever be." I believe that question could only be > answered by Harry and it's clear that he likes them both very much. > I think that both types of support are valid and necessary to Harry, > and that just because one prefers one type to the other does not make > it true that one type of friendship is "better" than the other. > Although I like Ron's variety of friendship more, I would never claim > that he's "a far better friend" than Hermione could ever be, that's > all. > > Devin One small addition: It's always Ron, not Hermione, whose mentioned by the narrator as Harry's best friend (usually when he's missing them during his summers with the Dursleys). Most notably it's Ron, not Hermione, whom Harry is assigned to rescue in the Second Task of the Tri-Wizard Tournament. The "thing he would miss most" is his "Wheezy." (It's Viktor Krum who would miss "Hermowninny.") Carol From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 07:47:07 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:47:07 -0000 Subject: Neville and the Clean Break In-Reply-To: <000601c3afe7$78b80d60$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85616 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" wrote: > > > Joj : > > ...edited... > > Ron's wand broke to serve the plot. ...edited... > > Which brings us to Neille. There was no purpose served by his wand > being broken. The importance of it happening, therefore, must come > in the replacing of that wand. There must be either an improvement > with the new wand, or we find out something about the old wand or if > Gran will "kill him" for breaking it. It just seems very significant > to me. > > > Joj (mom31) bboy_mn: I think Neville's wand was broken for a purpose. To see the purpose we must first look at Neville's Grandmother. She is holding Neville to the idealized standard of her once popular and now disabled son; Neville's father. And in doing so, is constantly critisizing Neville and thereby undermining his confidence, for not measuring up. He doesn't have the talent his father has. He's not up holding the family name. Etc... Of course, Neville can never measure up against an idealized heroic martyred standard of his father because, first, he is not his father, and second, no one can live up to a standard like that. And let's not forget that his father was an older experience wizard, and Neville is just a little boy with little experience, few opportunities, and not much support. Certainly, Gran gave Neville his father's wand in hopes that Neville would live up to him. In sense, she is trying to recast Neville in his father's mold. Neville's wand breaking is one of the steps to Neville becoming and being recognised as a powerful wizard in his own right. His grandmother will eventually have to recognise Neville for his own skills an accomplishments. Excelling in the DA Club was the first step, his heroic actions at the Ministry of Magic - Dept of Mysteries was the second, the third step will be finally getting his own wand, the next of many steps will be to continue to become a unique, accomplished, and repected individual as he continues to improve in DA Club, DADA and his other classes, and continues to show his courage and heroism. Indeed, Neville needed a clean break from his old self, and breaking his father's wand is a very symbolic way of doing that. I had this, sort of, fantasy that Neville will invite Harry, Ron, and Hermione to his birthday party, which is very close to Harry birthday. This would provide the perfect opportinuty for Gran to start ragging on poor Neville about not being 'good enough', and for Harry to set her straight in no uncertain terms by recounting Neville's heroic deeds in the fight against the Death Eaters. About time she realized that Neville doesn't have to be his father in order to be worthy of admiration. Just a thought from an obvious Neville fan. bboy_mn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 07:48:09 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 07:48:09 -0000 Subject: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85617 > Fifty: > > I haven't read my books for a while now but I thought that we know > > that James and his friends were all in Gryffindor. And Snape was > > Slytherin. Isn't that right? If that is right then that means > that > > Wormtail was a death eater and so not all of the Gryffindor's are > > good. And Snape is good so that's another thing that makes it so > that > > being in one house doesn't mean that you will stay the way that > house is. > > Cheekyweebisom: > I disagree. I think the qualities of the four houses are qualities > deeply ingrained in one's personality. I think if you're a > Gryffindor, you will always be a Gryffindor. That said, I don't > think being a Gryffindor makes you good. Courage can lead to great > things. It can also lead to foolhardiness. You can be evil but very > brave. > > I particularly take issue with your description of Snape -- > that "being in one house doesn't mean that you will stay the way > that the house is." Even if it doesn't, Snape's a terrible example > of that, IMO. Snape is SUCH a Slytherin. So he isn't evil. So what? > Slytherins are not evil by definition; they're cunning and > ambitious. And usually pureblooded. Snape is very cunning. He's also > very brave, but I think cunning is his strongest trait. So yeah. I > think he is the way Slytherin house is. So's Draco. So's Moldy > Voldy. I think the houses have no moral alignments. I agree with everything you said except that cunning is Snape's strongest trait. I would argue that it's ambition (note his long and detailed DADA O.W.L. exam and his persistent attempts at applying for the DADA teaching position), but as you noted ambition is also a Slytherin trait. His early interest in the Dark Arts would also, I think, have suggested a placement in Slytherin over Ravenclaw for his obvious intelligence or Gryffindor for his courage. The only house where he would be a complete misfit is Hufflepuff. But I think the Sorting Hat knew what it was doing. As Cheekyweebisom says, he isn't evil, but neither is Slytherin in and of itself, and he definitely belongs there. In fact, he's the Head of that House and notoriously supportive of the Slytherin quidditch team. How much of his partisanship is a cover for his position in the Order, I don't know, I do think some of its real. So far as I can determine from the glimpses we've seen, his family life was as bad as Harry's or worse. Hogwarts and specifically Slytherin House is the only home he knows. Carol, who is trying to remember a particular Slytherin that Snape doesn't have but can't think of it at the moment From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 08:04:51 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 08:04:51 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85618 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zihav" wrote: > Greeting: > > First off, sorry if this has been mentioned before, I did a search > and could find anything on it as far as Narcissa is concerned. I have > been thinking about this since GoF. > > As the subject line says I think Narcissa is the ture spy for the > Order and Snape is only the go between. Snape can't possibly go back > to the Death Eaters he would be killed right away. > > Now why: > > In GoF when we first meet her she has a look of something bad > smelling right under her nose. What if she hates her husband, but > can't leave without leaving her son behind which she wouldn't do. > > She hates what her husband becasue what he has done to her son > (making him a second generation DE) and wants to protect him from > that life of going no where. > > She's the one who prevented Draco from going to Drumstrang. She's > always sending sweets and seems to be the one more concerned about > her son's welfare than the father. > > I think she has a lot of motives to be the spy and also she's in a > better postion to know what's going on with all the Death Eaters and > Voldermort than Snape at this time. > > JKR also said that Snape will fall in love at some point. What if he > all ready is and it's Narcissa. This could explain why he treats > Draco so well when he knows his father is a DE. If caught they could > claim that Snape put a curse on her and take the fall and being good > at Occulmency would be enough to get away with it. > > The only hole is in OotP where Kreacher goes out to the other Black > family, but that might have been discounted as not being very > important becasue he couldn't say anything about the Order. > > What do you think? > > Tom I haven't read the other responses so maybe this has been mentioned, but aren't you forgetting the treacherous House Elf Kreacher, who straight ran to Narcissa when Sirius told him to get out of the house? Narcissa may not be a Death Eater like her sister (at least not that we know of), but she's deinitely on the Dark side. (And sending sweets to Draco is indulging him as Petunia indulges Dudley.) I can't imagine Snape and Narcissa in love. Besides, it would be an adulterous love, and JKR isn't going to write on a topic like that even in Book 6 or 7. Also I agree that Snape can't go to Voldemort without being killed, but I think he *can* go to Lucius Malfoy with some cunning lie about why he wasn't with the Death Eaters in the graveyard. He hasn't studied occlumency (and legilmency) for nothing. I have an idea that Malfoy suspects him but also greatly underestimates him. At least I sincerely hope so. Carol From silmariel at telefonica.net Fri Nov 21 11:46:32 2003 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:46:32 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: The Case for Lupin In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200311211246.32832.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85619 Anne wrote: > Sirius and Bellatrix were in a very prominent > spot. There would have been much easier and much safer ways to > get rid of Sirius, since the other people in the room could > change where they were looking as quickly as Lupin could. So everyone would think it has been Bellatrix, wich is a good thing. So S&B were in a prominent spot, attracking atention to themselves, being the focus of the witnesses, and letting R/L search for a good moment. A cleptoman can do it, sure an assasin could do. > And who was with Malfoy all the time? Lupin? I missed the part > where they were with eachother all the time. Well, not all the time :) but when Lupin orders harry to go away (or gets him out of the picture so that he can shoot at ease), he is with Malfoy, then Harry moves so Malfoy and Remus are out of his sight, but they were together and in the position to do the work. > And what reason could Lucius have for wanting Sirius dead? Just out of disgust for a blood-traitor? Not just wanting him dead. Having him killed by Bellatrix. Family Reasons, called money and the Black's possesions. Aren't killers disinherited from its own's victims heritages? If Bellatrix is marked as the culprit, she is out and the only obstacle for little Draco to inherit Grimmauld Place is Andromeda, who is a lesser obstacle. > And if Lupin wanted Sirius dead, he could have handed him over to the dementors in POA. And blow his cover up? When Sirius was going to be dementoriced because everyone believed he was a murderer? Why? Could he know the kids were going to use a TTurner and save the day? I'm not saying to kill Sirius was plan A, but if the chance was there, he had people around with motives (if they are ESE, that's it) to kill him. Apart of the list of reasons already exposed on-list in 'Guilty Dumbledore', I think, or 'Guilty Again' threads. Silmariel From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 12:59:30 2003 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:59:30 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's animus toward the Potters/the prophecy (was Replay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85620 To me, Voldemort's animus toward the Potters was because of his anger at finding out that a child would be born that *could* have the ulimate destiny to kill him. And the *could* brings me to the prophecy. Voldemort only knew that a child would be born at the end of July (the seventh month) who could defeat him. His spy was discovered and thrown from the inn, so he missed the part about Voldemort marking him as his equal (Harry's scar, passing on his powers/parseltongue) and Harry having "power the Dark Lord knows not" (the abiliby to love maybe?). He also missed the important part about how "either must die at the hand of other for neither can live while the other survives." How is this important info to Voldemort? Because it would tell Voldemort that once he kills Harry, no other force/being/wizard can stop him. And it also lets Voldemort know that Harry CAN be killed. At this point, after numerous attempts to kill Harry, Voldemort must be wondering WHY he can't seem to kill this little boy - he may even wonder if he is even capable (due to prophecy/fate/etc) of killing him at this point. The prophecy would give an edge to Voldemort and his followers. They would stop at nothing to get ahold of Harry and bring him to Voldemort. There would be no more playing around if Harry was in front of him - Voldemort would kill him immediately as soon as he laid eyes on him. Harry wouldn't be able to walk anywhere without a squad of wizards protecting him because every follower of Voldemort would be out to grab him because Voldemort would know that he can't take over the world at all unless Harry is dead. Unlike Harry, who has to have something horrible happen (Sirius dying in front of him) to even try one of the Unforgivable curses on a person, Voldemort kills without a second thought. Harry needs time to learn and grow so he will be capable of taking on Voldemort and killing him when the time comes (book 7, of course). And keeping the prophecy secret from Voldemort will give Harry that all- important time to become Voldemort's murderer. To make sure the prophecy is kept secret, Dumbledore even keeps that old fraud Sybil Trelawney living inside Hogwarts so that all her future prophecies (two so far, after all) will be heard by the good guys -and ONLY the good guys. Diana L. --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "blueangelcvhp" > I don't think that really matters. If I were Voldeort, I would > > have > > tried to kill Harry and Neville. Therefore the Potters and the > > Longbottoms were both on his "to die" list. But maybe Frank and And another list member replied (sorry I forgot your name): > I've never really understood why getting the prophecy was so > important to Voldemort. From the beginning he's been trying to kill > Harry so why was it so important to get the prophecy?It didn't > really tell us anything new or anything that would help Voldemort > defeat/kill Harry. It just seems that he spent the whole book trying > to get the thing for no real reason. It was a brilliant book and I > was thrilled with it the whole way through but I found the prophecy > a bit of a let down. Especially without knowing how or why the > Potter defied Voldemort or why he chose Harry not Nevile. From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk Fri Nov 21 13:02:50 2003 From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:02:50 -0000 Subject: Snape and the DADA job In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85621 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, A Featheringstonehaugh > wrote: > > Perhaps Snape's desire for the DADA position and Dumbledore's > refusal of it may all be a charade; the intended implication being > that Dumbledore harbors some mistrust of Snape. > > > > AF > > > > If that's the case, we have to consider Dumbledore untruthful since > he's said about once every book, "I trust Severus Snape." The most > obvious illustration of that trust is at the end of GoF, after Snape > has very courageously revealed the mark on his arm to Idiot!Fudge, > when Dumbledore sends Snape off on a clearly dangerous secret mission > (my guess is that he has to present Lucius Malfoy with a plausible > excuse for not attending the meeting of Death Eaters). > > Has anyone listed the number of times Dumbledore has said directly and > openly, without Snape being present, that he trusts him? Surely (unles > we believe in ESE!Dumbledore, which I don't) there's no reason to > doubt his word. > > Carol The distrust of Snape is overt - Dumbledore and Snape are playing classic misdirection here. The IMPLIED mistrust is for the benefit of just about everyone but especially the like of Malfoy (both), and any other DE offspring who might want to go talking to their daddies, and LV himself. Not to mention any ESE!Other suspects who might be knocking around. Lets consider this from the other direction. You have a spy/double agent/ whatever who you trust implicitly. Now in order to keep him functioning as a spy/double agent, whatever, the last thing wanted is for this person to look like your fair-haired, best boy who you trust implicitly. Because if the real baddies believe you trust him implicitly, then the jig is up as far as his cover is concerned. If Dumbledore is showing he trusts Snape utterly, then the game is up because all of the DE and other hangers on are going to realise that there is a problem with Snape's outer image as DE, malcontent if DD is so keen on him that he even lets him near the Dark Arts. (Incidentally - Snape would be an excellent choice for DADA teacher on the set a thief to catch a thief principle). So there has to be a believable element of dislike, mistrust, grudge. Snape plays "man with a grudge" effortlessly well. So all you need to do to make this story sit up and beg is provide a grudge and demonstate that you DONT trust him really. Two key elements here: 1. "I trust Severus Snape" no explanation why, no story, no caveats, nothing else at all, just a very bald statement of absolute trust - which of itself causes me to believe that Dumbledore DOES trust Severus Snape absolutely. No defence is necessary from Dumbledore's point of view. 2. I won't let him teach DADA even though it's the job he wants. Actually, Snape has never come out and said baldly that it's the job he wants. The canon evidence for him wanting this job is Percy Weasley's remark in PS/SS - though correct me if I'm suffering movie contamination here - my books are at home and I'm not. Also in OOP Umbridge states that he has applied yearly for the DADA job since his original appointment to the Hogwarts staff. Why has he been refused this job- "you must take that up with Professor Dumbledore" or words to that effect. Curt and angry no doubt and that's exactly what we might expect. So Dumbledore trusts him totally but won't let him teach the kids how to repel jinxes and hexes, or about vampires (and as to that can of worms - let's not go there, right?) and werewolves. I believe that Snape is not really interested in the DADA job in the least. Sure he could probably teach the arse of everybody else in that subject because he's seriously smart and knows his stuff from the ground. The yearly application is a ruse between him and Dumbledore - he applies for it because it's in character for him to do so and harmonises with his rep as a disgruntled ex-Death Eater and also because I suspect that it's the sort of thing Voldy and Lucius want him to do. So he goes through the motions every year and Mean Old Dumbledore knocks him back - again. And that's what he tells LV and LM every August. Maybe LV hits him with a quick burst of Crucio for being useless, but spies have to take their lumps and given the look of Severus's daddy, he's probably taken a good many lumps in his time. His big scheme of things is the destruction of LV - for some reason we don't know. I don't believe incidentally that this was merely an intellectual decision because what we see of Snape's behaviour and past does not betoken a coldly intellectual Lenin type here. There's a good deal of emotional engagement in what's going on. I have my theories which I lean towards, but this post is not where they go. What I do believe is that when people like that have invested emotionally in something they wish to see happen, they are prepared to take a good many lumps in its cause. June From silmariel at telefonica.net Fri Nov 21 14:43:39 2003 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:43:39 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200311211543.39724.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85622 Steve: > I don't know enough about the geography and ecology of Tibet to > know if tropical birds exist there. Nepal has a frontier with Tibet and they share the common Himalaya region, but the south part has a subtropical jungle area, and I remember at least the spiders being very tropical-look for a casual turist like me. Silmariel From entropymail at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 13:44:04 2003 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 13:44:04 -0000 Subject: Were we right? New characters? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85623 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, kewiromeo at a... wrote: > > I mean seriously guys, look at all the predictions we made after > book 4. How > > many things were we actualy right about? I made some of the most > amazing and > > logical predictions but she completely steered me off course. > Everything came > > out of nowhere. Has anyone ever gone back and made some sort of summary of predictions for book 5 versus what actually occurred in book 5? I'd love to see which predictions actually panned out and which fell flat. Anyone have a few hundred spare moments to take on the task? :: Entropy :: From entropymail at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 14:02:04 2003 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:02:04 -0000 Subject: Neville and the Clean Break In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85624 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > I think Neville's wand was broken for a purpose. To see the purpose we > must first look at Neville's Grandmother. She is holding Neville to > the idealized standard of her once popular and now disabled son; > Neville's father. And in doing so, is constantly critisizing Neville > and thereby undermining his confidence, for not measuring up. He > doesn't have the talent his father has. He's not up holding the family > name. Etc... > > Of course, Neville can never measure up against an idealized heroic > martyred standard of his father because, first, he is not his father, > and second, no one can live up to a standard like that. And let's not > forget that his father was an older experience wizard, and Neville is > just a little boy with little experience, few opportunities, and not > much support. > > Certainly, Gran gave Neville his father's wand in hopes that Neville > would live up to him. In sense, she is trying to recast Neville in his > father's mold. This is, of course, assuming that Gran is just Neville's loving, if misguided, caretaker. However, if you believe that she is truly Evil!Gran, then her actions take on a new and sinister meaning. What if she is actually putting Neville down with the hopes of keeping his confidence so low that he doesn't question his near-squiblike lack of magical talent? If Neville believes in his heart that his talents are negligible, then he wouldn't even question why he has to use his father's wand, and wonder if he would do better after a proper visit to Ollivander's. She probably believed she had the whole thing all locked up and had Neville convinced of his squibdom before good ol' meddling Uncle Algie dropped him out of the window and forced a magical bounce out of him (notice how "botanicals" keep coming to Neville's rescue...Algie=algae). One final thought: perhaps her motives for keeping Neville in a bumbling state are not so evil after all. If Voldemort knows that Neville is near to useless as a wizard can come, and his parents remain in a curse-induced stupor, then he certainly would have little or no interest in harming the family any further. Why bother with a whole lineage that obviously no longer poses any threat? Maybe Gran knows that a bungling, insecure grandson is better than no grandson at all. :: Entropy :: From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 21 14:19:02 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:19:02 -0000 Subject: Why do you like Harry Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85625 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gmail11220" wrote: > I am a senior at Kenyon College and I am doing a research paper for > my senior project on the role of fantasy and magic in our society. > I am sure this question has come up many, many times. I am new to > this group so I do not know what has been said. Why do you like the > Harry Potter Books? I have read all the books myself but I am > interested in what other people think. This would greatly help my > project. Thank you. Now Siriusly Snapey Susan: Three reasons pop to mind immediately. Simply put, they are: 1) JKR manages to create characters which, even though magical and thus "unreal", come across as incredibly real. When I first read SS, I was *hooked* because I felt JKR truly captured what it felt like to be 11: the behaviors, the feelings, what *matters* to an 11-year- old. This has continued through all five books. 2) The layers. The story is so incredibly fully-thought-out. All kinds of clues, hints, statements and characterizations have been planted and then come back to *mean* something even if they didn't seem to matter much at the time of first encounter. It's such FUN to dig! 3) JKR's humor. Yes, the books have darkness and are becoming increasingly dark as they progress, but her humor shines through. Not just in the words her characters speak or the situations in which they find themselves, but also in her choice of names for people, spells & other magical "things" [Diagon Alley, Bellatrix LeSTRANGE, MunDUNGus Fletcher, Sirius becoming a black DOG, etc.]. Again, they often have hidden [or obvious!] meanings or Latin roots or are plays on words that just make it FUN. To be more succinct, the books are great fun and JKR has made me CARE deeply about her characters. Siriusly Snapey Susan...who graduated from Earlham College, not so very far from Kenyon. :-) From mom31 at rochester.rr.com Fri Nov 21 14:23:33 2003 From: mom31 at rochester.rr.com (mom31) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:23:33 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville and the Clean Break References: Message-ID: <000601c3b03b$0b779050$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> No: HPFGUIDX 85626 :: Entropy :: >This is, of course, assuming that Gran is just Neville's loving, if misguided, caretaker. However, if you believe that she is truly Evil!Gran, then her actions take on a new and sinister meaning. What if she is actually putting Neville down with the hopes of keeping his confidence so low that he doesn't question his near-squiblike lack of magical talent? If Neville believes in his heart that his talents are negligible, then he wouldn't even question why he has to use his father's wand, and wonder if he would do better after a proper visit to Ollivander's. Yup! McGonagall even said his biggest problem was his lack of confidence. It's quite easy to see it came from. A childhood filled with your caretaker telling you over and over how forgetful and sub-standard you are. And for good measure, she does it in public too! Seems to have worked quite well, too. I believe in Evil!Gran, but she could also be trying to protect him. Hey, maybe Snape's in on the plan to protect Neville and is just doing his part when he belittles Neville constantly? Nah! Joj, who is amazed by all the Snape lovers on this board. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From pixieberry at harborside.com Fri Nov 21 04:03:59 2003 From: pixieberry at harborside.com (Krystol Berry) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:03:59 -0800 Subject: Through the Veil [Filk] References: <1069385643.8781.41441.m20@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <002e01c3afe4$7e37db60$4c3a2d0c@pixie> No: HPFGUIDX 85627 Greetings! I'm de-lurking to send my first Filk (and my first post as well!). Hope you all have as much fun with it as I did writing it. :) Pixieberry THROUGH THE VEIL to the tune of No Such Thing by John Mayer "Welcome to Grimmauld" He said to me resentfully "What a treat. Please take care Past my mother's portrait there. Every time so much as a Floorboard creaks, Horrid shrieks." I'd like to think Fudge'll exculpate Him instead of Misconceive. Albus told him "Stay inside and hide." Now he's waiting On the Other Side. I wanna run through the Halls of the ministry. I wanna scream at the Top of my lungs "I can't believe he's through the veil and he's gone now; the godfather that I came to love." So the good boys and girls Forget Sirius Black Faded flash back Two way mirror Now it's shattered I'm so frustrated Cause I can't get the answers. Here without my parents I'm getting older I wish I could have Said goodbye just one last time. I'll relive memories Of the tragedy. Albus told him "Stay inside and hide." Now he's waiting On the Other Side. I wanna run through the Halls of the ministry. I wanna scream at the Top of my lungs "I can't believe he's through the veil and he's gone now; the godfather that I came to love." He was invincible When he was alive. I wanna run through the Halls of the ministry. I wanna scream at the Top of my lungs "I can't believe he's through the veil and he's gone now; the godfather that I came to love." I just can't wait Till I get back to Hogwarts I'm gonna scream out At Dumbledore. And when I stand in His office before him He will know what all this rage is for. From zanelupin at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 14:40:20 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 14:40:20 -0000 Subject: Were we right? New characters? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85628 Entropy: >Has anyone ever gone back and made some sort of summary of predictions for book 5 versus what actually occurred in book 5? I'd love to see which predictions actually panned out and which fell flat. Anyone have a few hundred spare moments to take on the task?< Hi Entropy and everyone else! Take a look at message 66007 or look in the files section for predictions.doc or predictions.txt. There's a compliation of the predictions made on the "Rock-Solid" predictions thread going on before OoP's release, pulled together by Derannimer and Dicentra. KathyK, who didn't make any on list predictions about book 5 From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Fri Nov 21 15:38:59 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:38:59 -0000 Subject: The trouble with Percy In-Reply-To: <20031120155609.46009.qmail@web20509.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85629 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, derek moore wrote: >> > Unless I missed something, I think that Percy (as well as the other Weasley Children) is reacting against being poor. I believe Percy thinks his way out of poverty is to be ambitious, follow the rules and cultivate "successful alliances". That's why he so adored > Mr Couch (in Percy's eyes the perfect role model). The Twins see their road to riches is through their joke shop. Ron sees his through personal accomplishment/fame and achievement. > Now Siriusly Snapey Susan: I think you may be on to something with this possibility. I'm not fully convinced that Percy has "gone bad" so much as that he is ambitious and has made some very poor decisions because of it. Doesn't anybody remember when Harry & Ron find Percy reading a book about Prefects in History [something about how they turned out, career-wise, I think?], and Ron whispers to Harry, "Percy wants to be Minister of Magic someday" [paraphrased]. Siriusly Snapey Susan From catherinemck at hotmail.com Fri Nov 21 15:50:21 2003 From: catherinemck at hotmail.com (catherinemckiernan) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:50:21 -0000 Subject: - Rabastan (was: The Gang of Slytherins) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85630 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Carol wrote: > *snip*(I'm still wondering about his brother Rabastan, mentioned > in another post. Anyone for an analysis of that name and its > possible significance?) > > Katrina responds: > While I could find nothing on "Rabastan," a quick search through > the astronomy sites for "Rastaban" turned up some very interesting > information. > > Catherine: Rabastan is > no more a common name than Rastaban, so why should JKR corrupt the > star name to create it? Surely the pure-bloods care about spelling? > Moreover his brother Rodolphus does not have a star name, and the > pure-bloods do name their families in sets, whether the astronomically > fixated Blacks, or the old-fashioned-feeling Weasleys. So I submit a > theory for Rabastan itself, that links the brothers, and justifies the > meaning (I hope). > > > > Carol: > > OTOH, maybe his name really is Rastaban, and Rabastan is just an > > uncaught typo? The Lexicon lists the name as Rastaban, which indicates > > that it's spelled that way somewhere in the series: > > > > http://www.hp-lexicon.org/azkaban.html > > > > At first I thought I had misspelled the name, but my copy of OoP > > definitely says Rabastan (Am. ed. 788). He isn't named in the Pensieve > > scene you mention but as you say, he's either the "thickset man who > > stared blankly up at Mr. Crouch" or "the thinner, more nervous-looking > > man, whose eyes were darting around the crowd" (Am. ed. 594). For some > > reason I'm leaning toward the second description--maybe because it's > > more interesting. I think only a dull-witted man would have married > > dear Bella. (No evidence, only a hunch.) I'm also curious as to why > > Voldemort skips over him when he mentions the Lestranges. The space > > where he pauses to mention them is only wide enough for two people, > > not three (GoF 650 Am. ed.) > > > > Does anyone know of any other place where he's named? Is he actually > > called Rastaban somewhere in the series? Maybe it would be mentioned > > in relation to the Longbottoms and the Cruciatus curse? > > > > Steve, can you help us out, please? > > > > Thanks, > > Carol > > In response to my own post, he's also Rabastan on OoP 114 (Am. ed.), > where Sirius talks about the Lestranges being put in Azkaban with > Barty Crouch, Jr. So that lets out my typo theory. OTOH, Rabastan > could still be a corruption of Rastaban, tying in with the > astronomical names of the Blacks. That makes about as much sense as > giving him and his brother Germanic first names to go with their > French last name. But on the basis of the evidence, I have to agree > with Catherine even though Katrina's theory is more intriguing. Sigh! > > There's still the question of what he's doing in the book and why > there are so many pairs of brothers (Albus and Aberforth, Regulus and > Sirius, Rodolphus and Rabastan), all with more or less matching names > but in some cases, contrasting personalities. (I'm waiting now for > Lupin's brother, Romulus.) > > Carol Not to mention Gideon and Fabian Prewitt (named for social reform societies?), and sisters Parvati and Padma. There are alos the Baddock and Creavey brothers. In fact, are there _any_ mixed-sex sibling groups other than the Weasleys? Maybe the Lestranges had a German mother - descent from Grindelwald, perhaps? Catherine McK From lynch at agere.com Fri Nov 21 15:19:12 2003 From: lynch at agere.com (zihav) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:19:12 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85631 > Narcissa would be great for that! We've met her before, we know a > bit about her, nobody has any doubt that she's evil (after all, she > did marry Lucius and spawn Draco didn't she?). It would be perfect! > I don't necessarily think it will happen, but what a clever idea! Tom: Thanks! I've been thing about this for a while. I don't think we know enough about Narcissa to *know* that she's evil. I have no doubt that Lucius is. Espically after CoS when he tries to curse Harry for loosing his house elf, but Narcissa we know very little. Except bits and pieces I mentioned. I doubt any of the DE's would suspect her and she probably doesn't have direct contact with Voldermort. I'm sure Lucius fills her in on things, she then tells Snape, who in turn tells the order. If caught, Snape and Lucius take the fall because Snape can lie. Works well I think, but I could be completely wrong. Tom From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Fri Nov 21 15:50:43 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 09:50:43 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville and the Clean Break In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000501c3b047$493e6ba0$6997aec7@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 85632 >bumbling state are not so evil after all. If Voldemort knows that >Neville is near to useless as a wizard can come, and his parents >remain in a curse-induced stupor, then he certainly would have little >or no interest in harming the family any further. Why bother with a >whole lineage that obviously no longer poses any threat? Maybe Gran >knows that a bungling, insecure grandson is better than no grandson at >all. Iggy here: Bouncing off of this particular thought, it could be that Gran has heard the prophecy somehow, and understands that Neville could still, potentially, be the one mentioned. Because of this, she's worked hard to produce in Neville the image of a bumbling, useless, and inept wizard in order to "hide him in plain sight." (After all, I don't think she'd simply try to hide him away from the rest of the world and never let him leave the house. And, in PS/SS, it's been proven that it can't be done anyhow... I think Hagrid would have been just as likely to be sent out after Neville as he was to get Harry...) Iggy McSnurd From catherinemck at hotmail.com Fri Nov 21 16:18:56 2003 From: catherinemck at hotmail.com (catherinemckiernan) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:18:56 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85633 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zihav" wrote: > Allie: > > Narcissa would be great for that! We've met her before, we know a > > bit about her, nobody has any doubt that she's evil (after all, she > > did marry Lucius and spawn Draco didn't she?). It would be > perfect! > > I don't necessarily think it will happen, but what a clever idea! > > > Tom: > > Thanks! I've been thing about this for a while. I don't think we know > enough about Narcissa to *know* that she's evil. I have no doubt that > Lucius is. Espically after CoS when he tries to curse Harry for > loosing his house elf, but Narcissa we know very little. Except bits > and pieces I mentioned. I doubt any of the DE's would suspect her and > she probably doesn't have direct contact with Voldermort. I'm sure > Lucius fills her in on things, she then tells Snape, who in turn > tells the order. If caught, Snape and Lucius take the fall because > Snape can lie. Works well I think, but I could be completely wrong. > > Tom I'm happy with Narcissa spying on either side - just as long as she gets a good part! And if the blonde hair is a clue that she is a metamorphmagus like her niece, she could be a very good spy indeed! Catherine McK From momy424 at aol.com Fri Nov 21 16:43:14 2003 From: momy424 at aol.com (Shannon) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:43:14 -0000 Subject: Draco Malfoy question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85634 I unfortunately have not been reading the posts for too long so maybe this was already discussed but my query is there are upcoming plot points being discussed in regards to Malfoy and I just want to know why Dumbledore would allow him to continue at the school, especially when his father is a comfirmed and arrested Death Eater. W ouldn't keeping someone like that at a school where there are other children pose such a risk their safety that you would have to assume Dumbledore would expell the children of known Death Eaters now the Voldemort is back? From foxmoth at qnet.com Fri Nov 21 17:15:55 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:15:55 -0000 Subject: TBAY: The Bill Weasley is Ever So Evil post (1 of 3) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85635 It's another typical evening in Theory Bay. Erin and George have taken a little walk in the woods, stopping before a giant fir tree whose top appears to have been blasted by can(n)on fire. George speaks: >>"It's just that, er, you've brought up some good characterization points, but what has your Evil!Bill actually *done* ? What makes him so evil? Elkins and Pippin have big long lists of the crimes ESE!McGonagall and Lupin supposedly committed. And don't even get me started on the Magic Dishwasher Defense Team (MDDT). They can go on all day about Dumbledore and his spies." and Erin replies: "Oh, so you want the evidence I promised you at the beginning? Well, you have to keep in mind that ESE!Bill has only recently officially come over to the dark side, and that his most horrendous acts will be committed in future books. But I think that I can come up with a few tidbits," Erin smiles. <<< There is a slight popping sound, and in the clearing appears a small but definitely rotund gentleman of the sort who can only be described as "dapper." His face is ornamented by an elegantly waxed moustache. George blinks. "Hercule Poirot! The famous Belgian detective created by Agatha Christie" he adds, in an expository aside. "You are correct, Monsieur," says Poirot, with his characteristic accent. "I have the honour to be the other H. P." "Madame," he says, bowing to Erin, "Forgive me for intruding, but I could not help being intrigued by your conversation. It is a most unusual situation for a detective, you see, to be confronted with the *absence* of a crime." "Yes," said Erin, "but as I was saying, I do have a few tidbits..." "Then perhaps, Madame, you are aware of the serious crime that has been committed? You are already aware of the unfortunate fate of Sturgis Podmore?" Erin looks blank. "Who?" "Sturgis Podmore," says George, "Order member, one of the advance guard, square jaw, thick straw-colored hair--" "Oh, right," says Erin. "He got busted trying to break through a high security door at the Ministry and they put him in Azkaban." "*Exactement*," says Poirot. "And the Lord Voldemort, how did he react?" "He -- He was *happy*, " says Erin slowly. "Harry's scar hurt in Umbridge's office, and the next day was when the Trio read about Podmore's sentencing in the Daily Prophet. But that doesn't make sense, does it? Why would Podmore try to break into the Department of Mysteries unless he was a Voldemort spy? But if he was a Voldemort spy, why would Voldemort be happy that he got caught and sentenced to Azkaban?" "You are correct, Madame But let us use the little grey cells. Let us suppose that M. Podmore is put under the Imperius curse, and attempts to steal the Prophecy while he is on duty for the Order. But he is caught breaking in, perhaps because he resists the curse. He will know, like M. Bode, that only Voldemort or Harry will be able to obtain the prophecy. We must then ask, how did Voldemort learn that Podmore was an agent of Dumbledore?" "Voldemort's got spies in the Ministry," George puts in, " although, as a Snape theory, I'm not really supposed to have opinions." "Vraiment," says Poirot with another little bow, "but if the Ministry had evidence that Podmore was connected with Dumbledore, they would have made sure that the Daily Prophet mentioned it." "So you're saying Podmore was betrayed by someone else in The Order?" gasps Erin. "It was ESE!Bill! I knew it." Poirot smiles. "One must endeavor to keep an open mind, Madame. There are many hedgehogs in the forest." Pippin From lisaeckleycocchiarale at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 17:11:30 2003 From: lisaeckleycocchiarale at yahoo.com (Lisa Cocchiarale) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:11:30 -0000 Subject: Draco Malfoy question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85636 "Shannon" wrote: "I just want to know why Dumbledore would allow him to continue at the school, especially when his father is a comfirmed and arrested Death Eater. Wouldn't keeping someone like that at a school where there are other children pose such a risk their safety that you would have to assume Dumbledore would expell the children of known Death Eaters now the Voldemort is back?" Lisa here: A couple of points: 1)to expel Draco would mean expelling children of all known DEs, which would likely be a significant portion of Slytherin House. 2)DD has emphatically stressed the importance of CHOICE over circumstances of birth, and so to expel students simple b/c of blood relationships would, I think, not be palatable to him. That said, however, the climate will likely change drastically post- OoTP. Perhaps DEs will begin summoning their children home from Hogwarts and away from DDs influence. From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 17:24:15 2003 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:24:15 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's next move (Ollivander's treachery) In-Reply-To: <000c01c3afd2$3650be00$eb6509d4@John> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85637 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "John" wrote: > > Exposed, with half his group locked up, what is You Know Who going to do next? > > Also, where would they get replacement wands? None of the group could go along to Diagon Alley and place an order for 5 or so new wands, let alone about the cost. > John There is a very good track record in canon of fugitives getting a hold of wands. Sirius was still on the run in GoF and OotP, and he had a wand (he apparated, etc.) By the end of OotP in the firefight, all the DE's that escaped from Azkaban fought with wands. None of these wands acted like Neville's inherited wand (unpredicatable, weak). They were full-force, tailored wands. The DE's must have been fit for and bought them somewhere. Barring a heretofore-unmentioned Wand Shop in Knockturn Alley, Ollivander's is the place you go when you need a wand. All the escapees needed wands and got them. Thus, so far, Ollivander supplied them. And there is that troublesome anagram -- An Evil Lord -- for Ollivander. TK -- Tigerpatronus From tigerpatronus at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 17:33:20 2003 From: tigerpatronus at yahoo.com (tigerpatronus) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:33:20 -0000 Subject: TBAY: The Bill Weasley is Ever So Evil post (1 of 3) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85638 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > "So you're saying Podmore was betrayed by someone else in > The Order?" gasps Erin. "It was ESE!Bill! I knew it." > > Poirot smiles. "One must endeavor to keep an open mind, > Madame. There are many hedgehogs in the forest." > > Pippin An excellent observation! I must, however, dissemble in that Podmore could have been betrayed by anyone in the Order including, as you well know, ESE!Lupin. Looking forward to your next two posts, which I assume will exclude other Order members by process of elimation and / or connect the LV spy to either curse-breaking or Gingott's. TK -- Tigerpatronus From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 21 17:40:13 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (B Arrowsmith) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:40:13 +0000 Subject: TBAY: The Bill Weasley is ESE post Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85639 Erin and George wandered out of the clearing, Erin animated but George still looking slightly sceptical. Silence reigned. The peace was shattered by rustling in the undergrowth; bushes shook, curses rent the air and a dishevelled figure burst out, tripped over a root and flattened a patch of wild flowers. "Huh. Never did fancy lilies - petunias are different, though." Kneasy (for it is he) painfully levered himself to his feet, hampered, as always, by a left leg encumbered by the diminutive, drooling, mucus-encrusted homunculus that is Snape!Son. "Gawd, nearly did meself a mischief; could 'ave been nasty. But it would've been even worse if them two had thought to dig a bit deeper." So saying he scrabbled through the already disturbed earth in front of the gravestone. After a few minutes rooting around, which at least allowed him to change the dirt under his fingernails, he uncovered a tin box. He reverently brushed the dirt from the lid to reveal, in glowing letters, "Gringotts. The Friendly Bank." "Here it is - me pension fund. This little lot should see me right for a few years." "That depends," said a voice in his ear, "on what it contains." Kneasy yelped and spun round. "Don't do that! creeping up behind me when I'm not expecting it!" He squinted at the figure in the shadow of the tree. "You are from the Daily Prophet, ain't you?" The other nodded. "Yes, and I must say that sounds like a very interesting story Erin's got there. Might make a page 2 splash." "Nah." Kneasy scoffed, "She's got it all wrong. This," he patted the box, "is the real story. This is your lucky day. It's got everythin'. Have a seat on that gravestone an' I'll fill you in. But you don't get the proof 'till we've agreed a price, right? A *good* price." Kneasy balanced the box on Snape!Son's head, fished in his pocket for the key, wiped it on the little mite's greasy, lank hair and opened the box. "Sorry, son, but the lock sticks. "Bill's a bad 'un, right enough, but not the way Erin thinks he is. See, it all started at Hogwarts. Mad about Quidditch, he was, but he was pretty mad about havin' no money either. None goin' spare in the Weasley family. So he starts doin' a few favours for Bagman, his Quidditch hero. Passes information, fixes a few House matches; Bagman makes a killin' layin' off bets and Bill gets his cut. Nice little earner. "O'course, this stops when he leaves school, but he still likes the readies, so he goes where the money is - Gringotts. T'ain't long 'afore he's into treasure 'untin' for 'em. Nice job, eh? But what he declares ain't exactly what he finds. Skims, don't he? What with that and the bonuses he can start to live high, wide an' 'andsome. travel, fancy clothes, jewellery, the lot. Cuts quite a swathe, our Billy; catches the eyes o' some o' the ladies. An' one of 'em catches his eye. "Besotted, he was. Showers her with gifts, takes her to all the best places, spends a fortune he does - a fortune he ain't got. So he skims some more." Kneasy sighed at the iniquity in the world today. "Not smart, but once a Veela gets 'er claws in you, you're dead meat. Should've realised, shouldn't he, Veelas ain't got that reputation for nothin'. Dear, oh dear. Anybody could've told him; been the ruin of many a poor boy, they 'ave. "Naturally, them Goblins keep an eye on the staff as well as on the books. Here's a treasure 'unter, livin' the high life and profits are down. An' guess what? Lots of gold scarabs an' things on the market. Not clever, not with the nasty, suspicious minds they got. So they re-locate him back to Head Office while the Auditors go out to Egypt." He shuddered. "Ever met the Auditors? No? Lucky you. Evil, they are, evil. Vicious, too. Don't use quills, they prefer thumbscrews an' a meat hook. "So Bill's back home, no more skimmin', no more bonuses, but he keeps on in the same old way. Can't stop; he's hooked. He's startin' to notice he's getting funny looks at the office, even on the mornings when he don't look like he's gone ten rounds with the Hogwarts squid. What he don't notice is that he's being followed everywhere, lots of notes, photographs; 'ere, just like this." He reached into the box and passed across a snapshot. "Merlin's beard! What's this? Oh, what a picture! Centrefold stuff!" "Yeah. That's from a time he went to see Madam Whiplash. Somethin' she does for special customers - the rubber waders, the goose-grease, the feather duster. Had to provide his own rubber duck, though." "Rubber duck? What's that for?" "That's what Arthur wanted to know. Bill asked him to get him one from the office." Kneasy shrugged and shuffled sideways out of the ever-widening pool of nasal emissions round his left foot. "Won't be long now before they 'as him strung upside down in front of their watch-dragon, askin' 'im some very pointed questions and stirrin' the barbecue sauce. Maybe he thinks so too. That's probably why he's tryin' to do a deal with Fudge. Pass on information, help him take over the Bank in exchange for a seat on the Board and an unlimited expense account. Always been fond of cash, has old Fudge; gives it to charity." Kneasy sniggered and rolled his eyes. "And very grateful Charity is too. She's got this special spell, 'Fallacious' or something like that. "Anyway, the Quibbler nearly got the story last year, but they wouldn't hand over the folding stuff. Seemed to think it was for the benefit of the public or some such tripe. But I got the proof right here. I got bettin' slips and thank you notes from Bagman, receipts, letters from Fudge, Auditors report and photos, lots and lots of photos. Here, you ever seen a Veela wrap her hair round.... no, on second thoughts I'll keep that one. "So; what'm I bid?" From mranan at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 17:48:03 2003 From: mranan at yahoo.com (Amura) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:48:03 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: <200311211543.39724.silmariel@telefonica.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85640 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Carolina wrote: > Steve: > > I don't know enough about the geography and ecology of Tibet to > > know if tropical birds exist there. > > Nepal has a frontier with Tibet and they share the common Himalaya > region, but the south part has a subtropical jungle area, and I > remember at least the spiders being very tropical-look for a casual > turist like me. > > Silmariel The southern Tibet has a relatively nicer weather, but large tropical birds just don't exist in inland Chinese regions. The humidity is a problem, and the place is still too cold for them...but you can find a few Pandas there :D I was thinking Sirius might hide in Bermuda :P From augustinapeach at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 17:50:09 2003 From: augustinapeach at yahoo.com (augustinapeach) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:50:09 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85641 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zihav" wrote: > Allie: > > Narcissa would be great for that! We've met her before, we know a > > bit about her, nobody has any doubt that she's evil (after all, she > > did marry Lucius and spawn Draco didn't she?). It would be > perfect! > > I don't necessarily think it will happen, but what a clever idea! > > > Tom: > > Thanks! I've been thing about this for a while. I don't think we know > enough about Narcissa to *know* that she's evil. I have no doubt that > Lucius is. Espically after CoS when he tries to curse Harry for > loosing his house elf, but Narcissa we know very little. Except bits > and pieces I mentioned. I doubt any of the DE's would suspect her and > she probably doesn't have direct contact with Voldermort. I'm sure > Lucius fills her in on things, she then tells Snape, who in turn > tells the order. If caught, Snape and Lucius take the fall because > Snape can lie. Works well I think, but I could be completely wrong. > > Tom Now AP: But Kreacher went to Narcissa when Sirius ordered him out. And she apparently gave the information Kreacher told her about the relationship between Harry and Sirius to at least Lucius, maybe Voldemort himself, to help set into motion the plan that led to Harry being lured to the MoM and Sirius' death. It seems to me that she recognized the value of that information for Voldemort's purposes or she wouldn't have bothered to mention it over supper ("Guess who dropped in today?"). I *do* think she could be developed as an interesting character in the next two books, whichever side she is on. From ajiva at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 17:16:53 2003 From: ajiva at yahoo.com (Azeem Jiva) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:16:53 -0000 Subject: Draco Malfoy question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85642 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shannon" wrote: > I unfortunately have not been reading the posts for too long so maybe > this was already discussed but my query is there are upcoming plot > points being discussed in regards to Malfoy and I just want to know > why Dumbledore would allow him to continue at the school, especially > when his father is a comfirmed and arrested Death Eater. W > > ouldn't keeping someone like that at a school where there are other > children pose such a risk their safety that you would have to assume > Dumbledore would expell the children of known Death Eaters now the > Voldemort is back? Its a simple answer really, Draco hasn't done anything wrong! Do schools kick students out of class because their fathers are in prison? Nope! So until Draco does something worth of being kicked out, there is no reason for Dumbledore to remove him. From shippingfanhh at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 18:14:24 2003 From: shippingfanhh at yahoo.com (shippingfanhh) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 18:14:24 -0000 Subject: Were we right? New characters? In-Reply-To: <97.40d9a8f6.2cecc967@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85643 Kewiromeo said: > Do you think that she is going to introduce even more characters? Hi, everyone. Yes, I think she'll introduce some new characters in the next book. There's the obvious need for a new DADA teacher. I also think she is setting up something important with the centaurs, and since they are all so hostile, I think we will see more new animal creatures. And I think she also said that we'd learn a lot more about ghosts, and I doubt we'll be stuck with just the four house ghosts. Ship From michaeljacksonfan1970 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 18:25:12 2003 From: michaeljacksonfan1970 at yahoo.com (michaeljacksonfan1970) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 18:25:12 -0000 Subject: Draco Malfoy question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85644 "Shannon" wrote: > "I just want to know why Dumbledore would allow him to continue at > the school, especially when his father is a comfirmed and arrested > Death Eater. Wouldn't keeping someone like that at a school where > there are other children pose such a risk their safety that you would > have to assume Dumbledore would expell the children of known Death > Eaters now the Voldemort is back?" I thought that Dumbledore isn't completely sure that Lucius Malfoy is really a DE. Did I remember that wrong or something? Anyway, sometimes it is more trouble than it is worth to expel a student like Draco. It might be better to keep him under your long, pointy nose where you can keep an eye on him. Besides, just because Lucius is a DE doesn't mean that Draco will become a DE. I don't know if Draco will stay bad or not, but I think it would be weird for Dumbledore to just expel him like that if Draco has not done anything that would justify being expelled. ~Madeline From dmoorehpnc at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 19:18:31 2003 From: dmoorehpnc at yahoo.com (dmoorehpnc) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 19:18:31 -0000 Subject: Neville and the Clean Break In-Reply-To: <000501c3b047$493e6ba0$6997aec7@Einstein> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85645 Entropy wrote: > >From: > >thought: perhaps her motives for keeping Neville in a > >bumbling state are not so evil after all. If Voldemort knows that > >Neville is near to useless as a wizard can come, and his parents > >remain in a curse-induced stupor, then he certainly would have little or no interest in harming the family any further. (Snip) > Iggy wrote: > Bouncing off of this particular thought, it could be that Gran has heard > the prophecy somehow, and understands that Neville could still, > potentially, be the one mentioned. (snip) >I think Hagrid would have been just as likely to be sent out > after Neville as he was to get Harry...) ME dmoorehpnc I'm with you Iggy, Dumbledore's explaination to Harry at the end of OoP about the prophecy doesn't hold up for me. I think Dumbledore is holding something back from Harry (so what else is new?). How will Harry kill Voldomort unless he gets the jump on him? As we've seen in GoF both wands cancel each other out. I not only believe that Neville will have a big role in the books to come but he may indeed be the "MAN" to get Voldemort. dmoorehpnc From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Fri Nov 21 19:28:50 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 19:28:50 -0000 Subject: About a messy post, and about Neville (Re:I *love* tragic endings ! ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85646 On Tuesday, I replied to a post by Jennifer (I *love* tragic endings; re: What if Harry dies?). To which Carol and Siriusly Snapey Susan (messages 85513 and 85572) answered: "You say that the WW has a short memory and I agree, but I think for Harry, that will be a good thing. Why would he want to return to the miserable world of his childhood? Why not live happily in the better one he's helped to bring about? Why not celebrate the release from his burden and share the short-lived glory with the other heroes (he won't be the only one) and when the fickle WW forgets him, why not be "Just Harry"? Harry isn't Frodo and JKR isn't Joseph Campbell. There's no reason for Harry not to find a place in the world he saved. Carol " "What about the possibility that sometime before the final battle [we all seem to be assuming it will be some big monstrous final battle, anyway], MANY MORE wizards & witches will join the ranks of those willing to fight--The Order, Dumbledore's Army, perhaps a new organization or army? What if, even if it IS Harry who has to be the one to kill Voldemort, hundreds of others are right there beside him, pushing back & eliminating Voldy's Death Eaters? Then, even though Harry would take that final action to ensure total victory, there would truly be hundreds [or thousands?] of others right there to [rightfully!] share in the glory. THAT would remove some of those pressures you went on to talk about. In short, I don't see that it would have to be seen as "all Harry" again. Look at SS/PS. Harry gets 60 points for his actions, yes, but Hermione & Ron each get 50, and Neville gets 10. Harry DIDN'T do it all by himself then. And look at what the members of the DA and the Order already did in the Ministry of Magic near the end of Book Five. No way Harry could have survived if it had been just HIM. With another year or two to build up to the climactic battle, who's to say he won't then be surrounded by a huge number of "helpers", which will take much of the pressure off of him? Siriusly Snapey Susan " Well, it seems that my former post was messy enough, so my main purpose didn't appear clearly. It wasn't a post about whether Harry will have to face "the final battle" alone. It was rather a questioning about whether the Wizarding World will be able to realize the necessity it has to change its behaviour. In other words: will the Wizarding World put into question its own apathy concerning discrimination, lack of a reliable justice, teaching traditions that encourage rivalry? Will the wizarding World understand the necessity of improving its institutions, for they are currently an open door to Dark Magic? And I finished writing that if Harry sacrificed his life but things kept unchanged, he would be as if he had died in vain. It would be only a truce until the raise of a new Dark Lord and the beginning of a new war. After Grindelwald came Voldemort, after Voldemort will come someone else, if wizards keep on following the same way. As Carol wrote very relevantly (sorry for the huge snip), there's no war without sacrifices, and those who give their lives do it in order to improve the world they live in. Now, what can we think of a society that didn't learn the lesson it was given, as the Wizarding World did? Wizards didn't learn from what happened with Grindelwald, they didn't learn either from the first raise of Voldemort. I agree that Harry won't fight alone, and that the necessity of acting together is a major topic in the series. I should have added in my post that not only his sacrifice, but every sacrifice, would be in vain if the Wizarding World didn't change anything the way it goes. They can't keep on waiting for one or thousands heroes to save the day; they need to face their own responsibilities, and they need to do it quickly. That's what is called citizenship, and it the matter of all. It seems that JKR had it on her mind when she wrote the pages of "Fantastic Beasts" in which she depicts the slow evolutions of the wizard laws concerning the classification of Beings and Beasts (nearly four centuries between the first decree and the definitive law! And we can add the revolt of Goblins; it shows that there were problems with the way wizards treat the others "citizens" of their world). We see it arise too at the end of OotP, when Dumbledore comments the way Sirius treated Kreacher or the way wizards represented themselves on the fountain in the Ministry of Magic. The Wizarding World appears to be rotten from the inside. It needs a deep reformation if it doesn't want to disappear. So okay, let's agree that Harry, that his friends, that every responsible creature in this world will have to fight, and sometimes to make the sacrifice of their own lives. But will the Wizarding World be able to pay a tribute to their sacrifice, using its memory, changing the way it goes so that the story won't repeat another time? Carol wrote also that JKR is not Joseph Campbell (he didn't write novels, so that's true there's a huge difference between them), and that Harry is not Frodo. True: if Harry and others survive, they will prefer a different Wizarding World and they probably don't miss the old one. But what if this world is exactly like "the miserable world of Harry's childhood"? So let's hope they will fight for the best, and not for another "Wizengaga", or for a society that will consider them as a shield in case of problem but will treat them like nutters or enemies the rest of the time; for a society that won't remember they have rights, not only duties. Concerning Campbell's scheme, though several episodes in the series tend to prove that Harry shares some characteristics with other heroes as he depicts them, I hope that JKR will find an original alternative, something new. Okay, that's certainly a big challenge, but it's what we like in her books, no? And now I come to the message by Siriusly Snapey Susan (nice alliteration, by the way), because it's the reason why I decided to give a reply.You remind the part Neville played in Gryffindor' victory at the end of Book 1. Let's see: 1) Harry gave his house 60 points, making it the equal of Slytherin. 2) Neville gave it 10 points. Only 10 points, yes, but those 10 points were decisive. Without them, Gryffindor wouldn't have won the Cup. That's very interesting; aside from the fact it's a very relevant example of the necessity of unity (a lesson Harry will have to learn quickly, I entirely agree with you). Now, if we transpose the anecdote from Book 1 to the war against Voldemort and the Dark Side, it could give: 1) Thanks to Harry, Good and Evil will come to a kind of status quo (neither Harry nor Voldemort can defeat the other without dying, and we already saw how they happened to neutralize each other because of their brother wands). Here are the 60 points. 2) So Neville will interfere and make the difference (How? It's anyone's bet. If he could kill Voldemort without killing Harry, I think it would satisfy many people ) Here are the 10 decisive points. Of course, that's only a supposition. But, well, it's part of the guessing game, isn't it? And that's how this long post ends. Hope it didn't bother you, for it's mainly "Bis repetita", atque non semper placent. Amicalement, Iris From kcawte at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 22 03:35:19 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 19:35:19 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Draco Malfoy question References: Message-ID: <001701c3b0a9$b09f0900$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 85647 ~Madeline > I thought that Dumbledore isn't completely sure that Lucius Malfoy is > really a DE. Did I remember that wrong or something? > K He was arrested an imprisoned after the finale of OoP - I assume Dumbledore is now convinced. It was Fudge who didn't believe Harry's listing of DEs after GoF, not Dumbledore. K From constancevigilance at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 19:53:36 2003 From: constancevigilance at yahoo.com (Susan Miller) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 19:53:36 -0000 Subject: Ponderables... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85648 > deedeee88 pondered: > >2. If only the heir of Slytherin could open the chamber of secrets >how was Harry able to open the Chamber of Secrets??!? > > sevenhundredandthirteen replied: > > The book never actually says that only the heir of Slytherin could > *open* the Chamber of Secrets, only that they are the only ones who > could *unseal* the Chamber of Secrets. > > From CoS Chapter 9 `The Writing On The Wall.' > Spoken by Professor Binns: > > "Slytherin, according to the legend, sealed the Chamber of Secrets so > that none would be able to open it until his own true heir arrived at > the school. The heir alone would be able to unseal the Chamber of > Secrets, unleash the horror within, and use it to purge the school of > all who were unworthy to study magic." > > Note that we have the use of the words `seal' and `unseal.' The way I > see it, Slytherin sealed the Chamber 1000 years ago. Tom Riddle, his > true heir, unsealed it 50 years ago. But no-one has resealed it in > any way. That is, *anyone* can now walk on down into the Chamber of > Secrets (provided they speak Parseltongue or are with someone who > does). So, Harry didn't unseal the Chamber of Secrets (which is the > only task restricted to Slytherin's heir) it was already unsealed for > him. He just opened the door to it. > > > Then DeeDee again: > > After OOP, what with DD saying that Mr. Riddle/Voldemort would mark > his nemisis as his equal....how can anyone say that Harry > just "reopened" the chamber??!???? Constance Vigilance (me) Actually, I say that. The way I read it, Tom unsealed the chamber each time. 713 is correct in pointing out that there is no discussion about resealing the chamber, but we don't really know what all Tom Riddle did in his last year at Hogwarts. However, Tom did come back to Hogwarts as Tom!Diary and therefore would be able to fulfill the requirement that only Slytherin's heir would be able to unseal the chamber. He used Ginny's body to do it, but the true heir (Tom) did the actual unsealing. The purpose of the unsealing, as stated in the legend, was to purge the school of those who were unworthy**. Diary! Tom was well underway to do that until he got distracted with the alternate goal of defeating Harry. But, like 713 says, I think that any parselmouth could have entered the bathroom and opened the Chamber, after it had been unsealed. Marking Harry as V's nemesis doesn't mean Harry is an heir of Slytherin, just that he is a powerful and dangerous wizard, from V's point of view. ** If the goal of unsealing the chamber is to purge the school of those unworthy, then that would provide a motivation for Lucius to ensure that the heir of Slytherin (Diary!Tom) was back in Hogwarts. Which would explain why he sent the diary to Hogwarts. Sending it with Ginny was an unexpected opportunity to discredit Arthur. Thoughts on that? Constance Vigilance From sunnylove0 at aol.com Fri Nov 21 20:05:33 2003 From: sunnylove0 at aol.com (sunnylove0 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:05:33 EST Subject: The Gang of Slytherins/Lucius and Draco Message-ID: <1e9.13c39907.2cefca0d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85649 Carol: I've said this before but my thoughts seem to become lost or forgotten as people respond to other parts of my posts, so please forgive me for saying it again. I'm sure you're right that the "gang of Slytherins" was for the most part older than Snape, who entered Hogwarts already knowing as many curses as they did. They may have been protective of the greasy-haired, skinny little boy who was nevertheless markedly intelligent and gifted, but they were apparently not around in his fifth year to help him fend off James and Sirius. By that time he seems to have become a loner. If Lucius Malfoy and his gang did protect Snape from James and Sirius, it might explain several points: 1) Sirius's description of Snape as Lucius Malfoy's "lapdog". 2) James's extreme prejudice towards Snape (not that it's excusable), since he is in the DE fast track group, and James hates the Dark Arts (does anyone else think that James''s parents were in an early version of the Order? I can actually see young James wanting to fight Voldemort, and being deemed of course too young, turning his anger toward the Slytherin contingent at school instead) 3) Snape's favor of Draco, perhaps not sucking up to Lucius Malfoy, but actually Snape seeing it as a debt of honor, since Lucius protected him from James and Sirius, to "protect" Draco from Harry and Ron, whether he needs it or not. Amber [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Fri Nov 21 20:06:12 2003 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 20:06:12 -0000 Subject: TBAY! ESE!Bill Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85650 An obviously nervous stranger enters the Royal George, trying to reach the barstool without attracting too much attention, his black cloak undecorated except for a brand new PARTY LINE badge. "Hey, are you sure you are allowed here ?" yells a formidable-looking man, seated at a table, looking him suspiciously, "this is an adult place, you do know it, don't you ?" "I am a grown-up !" retorts the man, blushing violently. "Oh yeah ? How come I have never seen you here then ?" asks the old man, standing slowly to impress the newcomer by his size. "What ships are you in anyway ?" "Er... I try to stay on shore, whenever I can" says the young man. "Ah, never been on board ! I think you'd better leave before something unpleasant happens to you, my dear" the old man says in a mock baby voice. The young man looks around, alarmed, looking for someone he could know. "I have an appointment here," he babbles desperately. "Leave him alone, you Old Fart" a confident voice suddenly says. "Besides, you are not Bellatrix, only she has a right to use a mock baby voice here." Standing upright at the end of the barstool, a red-haired woman in a long brown trench-coat looks directly at the man. The newcomers runs quickly towards her. "You are Erin, aren't you ?" he asks obviously relieved. "I am here to discuss some BB GUN material" he whispers. "Don't be so shy, Olivier" Erin shouts. "George has already posted an official BB GUN bearer, said people would feel more comfortable if everyone knows who is armed. Do you want to join? I happen to have one on me for you right now," she says, withdrawing a gun from under her trench-coat. "Er... thanks, I think I will wait you have a little more canon to add to it" Olivier says. "Besides, something is embarrassing me." "That I have noticed," interrupts Erin, pointing at the still suspicious old man. "I don't think you would have made it without me." "Certainly not, but that's part of the problem see" says Olivier. "It is my first trip here, and I don't want to make mistakes." "What do you mean ?" "Well, let us look at BB GUN. So Bill swears and annoys his mother, even though he should have grown-up by now. He wears dragon-leather boots (a bit flashy if you ask me) and a fang earring. He is so cool and so attractive (even Fleur falls for him, and I can tell you, it is not every day a French girl falls for a red-haired Brit). Following you, I would add he has some kind of curse-addiction. I mean, who wants to work as a curse-breaker in Egypt ? Molly wouldn't let Ginny enters in all the Pyramids. So here is a man working daily in place plagued by curses worse than being possessed Voldemort. And he's even enjoying it ! - 'No one at the bank gives a damn how I dress as long as I bring home plenty of treasure' - Robbing ancient wizards from their treasure is obviously his idea of fun. So here you have a rebellious youth, fascinated by curses and with a dubious sense of morality, maybe permanently traumatized by the loss of a younger siblings. The evil Weasley if I ever met one !" "Gee, you didn't want to speak, but once you have started you can't shut it" grumbles the old man. "See, see" says Erin, trying to force the GUN in Olivier's hand. "But, Erin" says Olivier in an uneasy whisper, "you have red hair, you love guns and canon, you wear a trench-coat and you even admitted you had a lot of friends like Bill. These?"would be the "Goths", the "alternative" people, the "Trenchcoat Mafia" types--the ones who "istened to?Marilyn Manson back when he was cool.??If you had a poem to write in English class, theirs would always be about death. Often very smart people, but bitter.? The very people who might think an Evil Overlord was Ever So Cool. Yes, I had?tons of friends?just like Bill."? Are you an evil Weasley too, Erin ?" All the best, Olivier From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 20:30:08 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 20:30:08 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85651 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "canismajorette" wrote: > Don't we hear in the first few pages that Sirius has lately been in Tibet? Do I recall that correctly? Then, it seems, no more is made of this, if I recall correctly. Now isn't that sort of a conspicuously odd detail? Should we expect this theme to resurface at some point? Laura: Well, we know that that's where Shrelock Holmes hung our for a while during the Great Hiatus. Maybe it's a particularly friendly place for good guys who need to disappear for a while. And achieving some peace of mind via Buddhist meditation techniques would do Sirius a world of good! From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 20:47:47 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 20:47:47 -0000 Subject: My predictions for book 6 & 7 - Either, Neither, Other... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85652 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ohyouaretheroots" wrote: > beyondtheveil imustnottelllies wrote: > > I think that by the end of Ootp JKR made her intentions quite > clear. "Either must die at the hand of the other" refers to two > people, and two people only: Voldemort and Harry. > ohyouaretheroots (C): > > ... there is little to no room for any "other" person in the > prophecy. If it was simply stated "Either must die at the hand of > the other" ..., but ... the second half of that passage: "for > neither can live while the other survives". "The other" can't be > anyone but Harry or Voldemort because "Either must die at the hand > of Pettigrew (or Neville) for neither can live while Pettigrew > (/Neville) survives" doesn't make any sense. ... It doesn't work. > > -C bboy_mn: Sorry but I disagree, the 'other' could imply a third person as in this example - "Either Harry or Neville must die at the hand of Voldemort, for neither Harry nor Neville can live while Voldemort survives." We must admit that the "... neither can live while the Other survives" is a bit confusing, since they 'can't live' but they ARE all living, so it seems to contradict itself. One could interpret what I wrote to mean that Voldemort will have to kill either Harry or Neville in order for the remaining one of the two to gain the power necessary to fully defeat Voldemort. In a sense, as long as both Harry and Neville are still alive, they are at an impass. To get all metaphysicall about it, as long as Harry and Neville are both alive, there is a balance in the universe that protects Voldemort. The loss of one creates an imbalance that leaves Voldemort vulnerable. I'm not saying I believe this, I'm just say that it could be interpreted this way, and make about as much sense as any other interpretation I've heard so far. Just a thought. bboy_mn From erinellii at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 21:11:26 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 21:11:26 -0000 Subject: TBAY: The ESE Bill post part 1 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85653 "If you can stand just a wee bit more background first, I'll soon be getting to all the canon for Ever So Evil Bill!" Erin is telling George excitedly as they stand in the Theory Bay woods before a giant fir tree whose top appears to have been blasted by can(n)on fire. "But, well, Bill hasn't really committed too many heinous crimes yet, so I'm afraid I have to lean pretty heavily on the characterization". George's handsome eyes bulge slightly at the thought of Yet More Characterization. But before Erin can begin, there is a slight popping sound, and who should appear in the clearing but Hercule Poirot, the famous Belgian detective created by Agatha Christie, who proceeds to inform Erin of the serious crime that has already been committed. The Case of the Unfortunate Fate of Sturgis Podmore. "So you're saying Podmore was betrayed by someone else in The Order?" gasps Erin. "It was ESE!Bill! I knew it!" But before Erin can finish hugging Poirot, jumping up and down, and screaming like a madwoman- "Canonical evidence for a spy in the Order! I knew I'd left something out of my theory! Thank you, detective, thank you!"- there was a rustling in the undergrowth; bushes shook, curses rent the air and a disheveled figure burst out, tripped over a root and flattened a patch of wild flowers. Kneasy painfully levered himself to his feet, and proceeded to do what it is that a Kneasy does best- make fun of Erin's carefully honed theory. After dragging over a Daily Prophet reporter, Kneasy scrabbles through the dirt in front of the Evil!Sirius hedgehog grave. The always meticulously finicky Hercule Poirot takes one disgusted look and *pops* right out of the scene. "Thank you again!" hollers Erin after him. Kneasy has uncovered a tin box which he claims holds the "correct" information on Bill- who is, in Kneasy's delusional version of events, an embezzler hooked on hookers and the high life. Erin begins to giggle as Kneasy expounds: " from a time he went to see Madam Whiplash. Somethin' she does for special customers - the rubber waders, the goose-grease, the feather duster.... "Anyway, the Quibbler nearly got the story last year, but they wouldn't hand over the folding stuff. Seemed to think it was for the benefit of the public or some such tripe. But I got the proof right here. I got bettin' slips and thank you notes from Bagman, receipts, letters from Fudge, Auditors report and photos, lots and lots of photos. Here, you ever seen a Veela wrap her hair round.... no, on second thoughts I'll keep that one. "So; what'm I bid?" Erin bursts out laughing as the reporter tells Kneasy the Daily Prophet figures an old drunk like him ought to be satisfied with ten galleons or so. "It'll buy you a liquid dinner for the next week, and that's all you bums really want, isn't it?" "Shouldn't have told them the Quibbler wouldn't take it, Kneasy," Erin advises. "I mean, come on, the Daily Prophet is really the only other game in town, isn't it? Here," she says kindly to Snape! Son, "I have some tissue if you'd like " Snape!Son ignores her outstretched hand and turns to drag his dripping nose across the bottom of Kneasy's patched and ragged overcoat. George, whose handsome visage has been growing steadily more puzzled throughout the convoluted conversation, takes one look at the snot- nosed little mite and runs off screaming. "But, Kneasy, you had a good point about Fleur Delacour being accustomed to the finer things in life. I wasn't going to bring this up in my main BB GUN theory, but since you mentioned it well, I think there's a darn good chance that Fleur is ESE also." Erin mentally apologizes to Oliver (whom her TBAY self has not technically met yet- those timeturners are tricky things) for maligning a fellow countrywoman, -albeit a fictional one- but decides to plunge on. "You remember when Fleur and the other Beauxbatons students arrived at Hogwarts? They, and especially Fleur, absolutely hated everything they saw at first sight. And you know, that's really *not * normal behavior. They almost seem to have taken a dislike to it before they even got there, don't they? And so, the question I would like to ask is this: What Voldemort supporter do they know who has been filling their heads with these preconceived notions that Hogwarts is such a terrible place? Who has taught them to be on their guard against anything they might appreciate or learn from Hogwarts? And what else has this mysterious influence taught them? People are all worried that Durmstrung will come out on You-Know-Who's side once the war begins. Way I see it, they ought to be more concerned about Beauxbatons. "Well," Erin says as dawn begins to break over the treetops, "I have an appointment to keep at the Royal George later this morning, so I need to get back to the trimaran and try to catch a few hours of sleep. Good seein' ya, Kneasy." Erin From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Fri Nov 21 21:12:34 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 21:12:34 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85654 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says My first assumption on reading that Sirius was using colorful tropical birds was that he was in Haiti. You know, Bermuda Triangle, Voodoo, all that. David Blaine, magician and stunt ninny, says he almost got beat up in Haiti: they weren't entertained, they were suspicious. Levitation doesn't faze them, he said, because they know their grandmothers can fly... --JDR From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 00:35:14 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 00:35:14 -0000 Subject: LV is the monkey, but who is grinding the organ? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85655 Katrina wrote: I found no reference in SS/PS that Quirrel was killed. > Also, Voldemort himself said: > > "The servant died when I left his body, and I was left as weak as > ever I had been," > > In GOF, in the graveyard scene, which seems to imply that one caused > the other, though not definitively... > > --Arcum I found the same quote and was going to post it but you beat me to it. The page reference is GoF 654, Am. ed., in "The Death Eaters." Voldemort didn't have the sorceror's stone, but he must have left Quirrell's body anyway because the disguise had been exposed and Quirrell was no more use to him. The question, for me, is why Quirrell died when Voldemort dispossessed him. It must, as someone in this thread suggested, have been the unicorn blood, unless Voldemort simply willed him to die. Or maybe he was a sort of parasite who had sucked Quirrell's life away along with his integrity. Carol From lucky_kari at yahoo.ca Sat Nov 22 00:49:42 2003 From: lucky_kari at yahoo.ca (lucky_kari) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 00:49:42 -0000 Subject: TBAY: The Bill Weasley is Ever So Evil post (1 of 3) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85656 Eileen is sitting on the hood of the Missus, when George finally strolls up to his car. "Long time no see," she says cheerfully. Her eyes, however, give no hint of cheer. "I'd heard you'd left town," says George evasively. "Left town without even leaving me a note." "George, is that lipstick on your cheek?" "You'd be surprised what the more inebriated customers get up to," says George. "I don't encourage them." "And where have you been? Strolling in the woods with some lovely young creature?" "Absolutely not," says George. "Now, how about we make an evening of this chance meeting and..." "Hello," says Erin, coming out of the woods. "Aha!" says Eileen. "No, it's not like that at all," says George. "Erin and I were... discussing things." "Redemption?" "Er... no." "George, you know very well you aren't supposed to talk anything but redemption," says Eileen. "I'm allowed to listen to other theories. I'm just not allowed to have an opinion," says George hastily. "Now, Erin here has an ESE!Bill theory, what do you think?" "ESE!Bill?" shouts Eileen and rushes towards Erin. Erin flinches. Then, Eileen flings her arms around her. "Yes! Yes! Yes!" "Errr..." begins Erin. "This is too good! It finally answers my question!" "What?" "Well, the reason I always keep an eye on these ESE posts is that Harry needs a traitor in his generation. He just needs one. James had a traitor. It'll be sloppy writing on JKR's part if no one betrays Harry. So, I've been afraid, because the two most obvious choices for traitors were two of my favourite characters: Percy and Neville. Of course, OotP helped set my mind to rest about Percy. I mean, you can't betray someone from a position of non-trust. But ESE!Bill is jolly good, because it fulfills the need for the traitor, and yet doesn't make it completely irrelevant to the reader." "How so?" asks George. "Most people don't care anything for Bill." "Yes," says Eileen. "But they do care for the Weasleys." From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 00:52:23 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 00:52:23 -0000 Subject: Challenging Lexicon timeline (was Ron's dead brother) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85657 > > Erin: >Also, if Charlie left before Wood even got there, how > would > > Wood be able to compare their flying styles? > > > > Erin > > > > It took the team three years to win not because they were a bad > team. The first year (Harry's first) Harry was not able to play > because of the whole Stone issue. The second year Quidditich was > cancelled because of the Monster of Slytherin. > > Diana Harry does play during his first year (Quirrell puts a curse on his broom, remember?) and the second year darling Dobby puts a spell on the rogue bludger so Harry will be injured and sent home. Carol From grahadh at yahoo.com Fri Nov 21 23:56:12 2003 From: grahadh at yahoo.com (grahadh) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 23:56:12 -0000 Subject: Why do you like Harry Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85658 In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gmail11220" > wrote: > > I am a senior at Kenyon College and I am doing a research paper for > > my senior project on the role of fantasy and magic in our society. > > I am sure this question has come up many, many times. I am new to > > this group so I do not know what has been said. Why do you like the > > Harry Potter Books? I have read all the books myself but I am > > interested in what other people think. This would greatly help my > > project. Thank you. > Now me: The Harry Potter books, for me at least, are those wonderful stories that pull you inside. When I read the HP book I am there at Hogwarts experencing everything along with Harry. I am unaware of how much time has passed or of what else is going on around me. Also, I was recently talking with my sister about how real Harry Potter and the WW sometimes seem, her reply was that to her, Harry _was_ real. (She is able to seperate fantasy from reality, but chooses not to in this case :-) I think this is because the stories are set on Earth, present day. This makes them easy to relate to and it becomes easy to imagine that they are really happening. This may be especially true for non-British readers, who may not be totally familiar with Britian, so it is a real place that is familiar, yet foreign enough to hold a bit of mystery. Hope that helps. -D.G. (another Earlham alum (Fight, Fight Inner Light!)) From lunatique0619 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 01:00:08 2003 From: lunatique0619 at yahoo.com (Jee H. Lee) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:00:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Draco Malfoy Question Message-ID: <20031122010008.12496.qmail@web13113.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85659 > I just want to know > why Dumbledore would allow him to continue at the school, especially > when his father is a comfirmed and arrested Death Eater. As far as I can see, expelling the DEs' offspring from Hogwarts is an excellent way to ensure their becoming DEs themselves. They wouldn't have anywhere else to turn to, and the bitterness alone would make them easy prey for Lord Thingy. Also, an important rule in politics is to never, ever make martyrs of your enemies. (A lesson villains often forget...) Expelling underage wizards for crimes they didn't commit is an excellent way to make them look like the victims, which Dumbledore wouldn't want to do. Shannon: > Wouldn't keeping someone like that at a school where there are other > children pose such a risk their safety that you would have to assume > Dumbledore would expell the children of known Death Eaters now the > Voldemort is back? As another poster has said, keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. Sure, kids like Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, Nott etc. pose a potential risk to other childrens' safety--but that's the same everywhere in the WW now that Voldemort is back. Nobody and nowhere is safe, and the false sense of security from eliminating the "bad apples" could be even more dangerous than keeping them close, and keeping an eye on them. I say false sense of security because the obviously dangerous elements aren't the real danger--remember Book 1, where Snape was the obvious suspect and Quirrell turned out to be the real baddie. Everyone will be wary of Draco et al. because their fathers are in Azkaban for being Death Eaters, precisely why they couldn't try anything, at least successfully. No, the real danger is the people no one will suspect. That's why I believe expelling the Death Eaters' kids will do more harm than good. Aside from the practical merits of such a move, as others have said Dumbledore would never expell any students for the crimes of their parents. Of course, Fudge and the MoM is another story. But if Snape can shove his Dark Mark under Fudge's nose and still work at school, I don't expect Draco has anything to fear. -Lunatique --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 01:05:18 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 01:05:18 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85660 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kelly" wrote: > The Sergeant Majorette says > >>Am I the only person that *doesn't* find that age gap odd? Most > of the nuclear units in my extended family are configured like that>> > > A valid point. I have 3 siblings myself, and the one closest to me in > age (my sister) is 16 years older than I. My mother didn't give birth > to any still borns during that time frame, nor did she miscarry. In > her case she had simply intended on having no more children after my > sister was born. My birth was simply unplanned. > > I think it's plausible that Mr. and Mrs. Weasley faced the same > situation in which they were happy with the children they had, but > just ended up having more children than they planned. Admittedly it > is quite a few unplanned pregnancies, but it's still a possiblity. > After all, sometimes the simplest explanation is the correct one. > > Kelly Molly probably missed having small children around so when Bill was at Hogwarts and Charlie was almost old enough to join him, she decided to have another one, and then two more, and then yet another boy, and then tried one last time to have a girl. Voile! She had Ginny and decided that was enough. And now, thirty years or so after Bill's birth, she's stuck with a major case of empty nest syndrome. Let's hope that after the war Bill marries Fleur and gives her some little red-haired Veela-like granddaughters. Carol From zanelupin at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 01:08:31 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 01:08:31 -0000 Subject: Challenging Lexicon timeline (was Ron's dead brother) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85661 Diana: >>It took the team three years to win not because they were a bad team. The first year (Harry's first) Harry was not able to play because of the whole Stone issue. The second year Quidditich was cancelled because of the Monster of Slytherin.<< Carol: >Harry does play during his first year (Quirrell puts a curse on his broom, remember?) and the second year darling Dobby puts a spell on the rogue bludger so Harry will be injured and sent home.< KathyK: I don't think Diana was saying that Harry didn't play *at all* but the reason it took Gryffindor three years to win the Quidditch Cup once Harry assumed the Seeker position was because of other reasons than the Gryffinodor team not being any good. In PS/SS, Gryffindor failed to win the Quidditch Cup because they were short a player for the last match as Harry was unconscious from his encounter with Quirrelmort. In CoS, after Hermione and Penelope Clearwater were petrified McGonagall postponed all Quidditch, and the teams were unable to finish the year. Gryffindor again could not win the Quidditch Cup owing to circumstances unrelated to their talent and skills. KathyK From steve at hp-lexicon.org Sat Nov 22 01:08:46 2003 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 01:08:46 -0000 Subject: Rabastan - name meaning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85662 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Does anyone know of any other place where he's named? Is he actually > called Rastaban somewhere in the series? Maybe it would be mentioned > in relation to the Longbottoms and the Cruciatus curse? > > Steve, can you help us out, please? The name is Rabastan, as many of you have pointed out. I fixed the typo on the Azkaban page. As for the name meaning, there is no obvious right answer, although there are some weird ideas floating around. I don't believe for one second that it's a "combination of the Icelandic "rabba" meaning "to babble" and the old English "stan" meaning "stone" (possibly referring to a church where the priests talk too much) or from "rabba-son" meaning son of Rab, Rabba or Raban (hraban=raven)." That's from a website that lists ridiculous theories for finding hidden messages in names. This is one of the less bizarre theories. That page also includes that silly "Running Weasel" contrivance among others. The site I find most credible on matters like this is the Akashic Record. They list Rabastan as: 'Probable corruption of Rastaban, a star whose name means "head of the snake".' That sounds right to me. First of all, so many of the people in the Black family have names from stars. Second, that particular star seems to fit a scummy Death Eater, just like Sirius fits Sirius, the dog animagus. Third, Rowling loves to tweak things a little to make them her own. She did this a lot with spells in earlier books-- Wingardium Leviosa is a good example. Latin doesn't use the letter 'w' and the word 'wing' is unabashedly AngloSaxon. So she tacked on a fake Latin ending to make it sound good. Why alter Rastaban? I don't know, but I can imagine that she just liked the sound of it better as Rabastan so she just arbitrarily changed it. Is this for certain? Nope. But it makes the most sense to me. If I get a chance to chat with Rowling, I'll try to remember to ask her. I have to ask about Elfrida "Cragg" too. Steve Vander Ark The Harry Potter Lexicon From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Sat Nov 22 00:25:01 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: 22 Nov 2003 00:25:01 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Rabastan - name meaning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1069460707.7650.1.camel@Bujold_RH> No: HPFGUIDX 85664 Of course, the thing that Rabastan reminded me of was Rabadash in 'The Horse and His Boy' by CS Lewis. A cross between 'Rabadash' and 'Shasta' or similar names. Angel From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 01:30:21 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 01:30:21 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85665 > Carol: > > > But if he were to leave Hogwarts at the end of > > Book 7, I wonder where else he could go (other than > > rejoining the dark side, which I'm sure he won't do). > > Maybe the Department of Mysteries could use his talents. > > > I'd always noticed that he was referred to as > "Potions Master". I'd supposed "Master" was a > title that he'd had to achieve a very high level > of proficiency to earn. > > In POA, when Lupin receives the wolfsbane potion, > he says that he was "lucky to be working alongside > Professor Snape", because "there aren't many wizards > who are up to making it". > > My point is that someone with Snape's skills and > education shouldn't have trouble finding a post > in the WW. > > I admit his DE past might hinder him, but I don't > think it would keep him from finding employment, > especially since he's been acquitted for over 15 > years. > > Yolanda I wasn't thinking of his DE past, which I agree wouldn't be a detriment to someone with his intelligence. My concern is that there don't seem to be many careers available in the WW other than teaching, reporting, owning a store, or working for the MoM. He could be an auror, of course, but where would he find a position that was worthy of all that knowledge? Would an auror have ause for potions? He's like an American with a PhD in English--overqualified for everything except teaching, research, or editing. (Speaking of myself here!) So what I meant was, where other than the MoM could he go to use all that knowledge and subtle intelligence? St. Mungo's, maybe? Anyone for Snape as a healer? I can't picture it. So really I think the DADA position is the best that's available. He could be one of the outside examiners who come in to administer the O.W.L.S. and N.E.W.T.S., but that seems like short-term employment. Carol From kcawte at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 22 09:44:02 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 01:44:02 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx References: Message-ID: <000901c3b0dd$293e8510$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 85666 Carol > I wasn't thinking of his DE past, which I agree wouldn't be a > detriment to someone with his intelligence. My concern is that there > don't seem to be many careers available in the WW other than teaching, > reporting, owning a store, or working for the MoM. He could be an > auror, of course, but where would he find a position that was worthy > of all that knowledge? Would an auror have ause for potions? He's like > an American with a PhD in English--overqualified for everything except > teaching, research, or editing. (Speaking of myself here!) So what I > meant was, where other than the MoM could he go to use all that > knowledge and subtle intelligence? St. Mungo's, maybe? Anyone for > Snape as a healer? I can't picture it. So really I think the DADA > position is the best that's available. He could be one of the outside > examiners who come in to administer the O.W.L.S. and N.E.W.T.S., but > that seems like short-term employment. > K He could set up as an apothecary for a start. I almost guarantee Madam Pomfrey doesn't make the potions she uses in her work any more than a doctor in a hospital makes the medication he prescribes. If he sold mainly to places like St Mungos it would limit the amount of time he had to spend dealing with people. He could even set up with a partner (assuming he could find someone who wanted to work with him - *raises hand hopefully* ) so the partner handled the customers and the finances and he made and invented potions all the time. I suspect that would suit him down to the ground. K From patnkatng at cox.net Sat Nov 22 02:05:22 2003 From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 02:05:22 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85667 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amura" wrote: > > I was thinking Sirius might hide in Bermuda :P Now Katrina adds: Couldn't have been Bermuda. There aren't any large tropical birds there, either. DDT and imported livestock (notably pigs) killed them all decades ago. I don't think it's tropical enough, either. Hmmm. Must be further south. . . What about Australia? They have some big, flashy birds there, too. We know the WW is in Australia from QTTA. It's a possibility. From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sat Nov 22 02:32:46 2003 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 02:32:46 -0000 Subject: Quirrell (WAS: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85668 Carol wrote: Quirrell was also undone by his own weakness. Voldemort chose him as a servant because he was "young, foolish, and gullible" (GoF--I don't have the page number handy but I can find it if anyone wants it)?and because he was a teacher at Hogwarts. (Either he had just been hired or the jinx wasn't in effect yet. I think the former, since Snape had applied for about the eleventh time and had not received the position.) I think he pretended to faint when he ran into the dining hall to inform everyone of the troll in the dungeon. He certainly wasn't afraid of the troll, which he had brought in himself (controlling trolls was his one qualification for the DADA post, I suppose), but he may really have been so terrified by the prospect of failure that he really did faint. So why is he so different at the end of the book? What happened, exactly? Has he simply dropped all his pretenses or is he really stronger than the foolish young man he was when Voldemort first started using him? ---------- Bookworm: I have been under the impression that Quirrell had been at Hogwarts for at lest a year before the start of SS/PS. On page 70 (Ch 5, US) Hagrid introduced Quirrell to Harry saying, "Professor Quirrell will be one of your teachers at Hogwarts." Later on the same page, Hagrid said, "Told yeh, didn't I? Told yeh you was famous. Even Professor Quirrell was tremblin' ter meet yeh ? mind you, he's usually tremblin'." Considering all of the DADA teachers after Quirrell have arrived at Hogwarts at the same time as the students, Hagrid wouldn't necessarily have met Quirrell yet if it was his first year, and wouldn't have known that Quirrell was "usually tremblin'." On page 126, Percy tells Harry "Oh, you know Quirrell already, do you? No wonder he's looking so nervous, that's Professor Snape. He teaches Potions, but he doesn't want to - everyone knows he's after Quirrell's job." It sounds like Percy already knows Quirrell, and that Snape was "after Quirrell's" job, not "after the DADA" job. The implication is that Quirrell wasn't new to the job. IIRC, somewhere else we are told that Quirrell went to Albania during the summer to do research. [If someone remembers the reference, please point me in the right direction :-)] This also sounds like he had taught for at least one year already and was doing research to increase his knowledge. As Carol pointed out, the difference between the trembling Quirrell at the beginning, and the confident Quirrell at the end is striking. On page 288, "Quirrell smiled. His face wasn't twitching at all." And later "Quirrell laughed, and it wasn't his usual quivering treble, either, but cold and sharp." On page 291, Quirrell tells us how he had been young and foolish, but Voldemort had converted him. "`He is with me wherever I go,' said Quirrell quietly." Constant brainwashing will have an effect eventually, and he had the self-confidence of knowing that he had the force of Voldemort's power behind him. [Although, he still wasn't very strong when fighting Harry unless Voldemort was ordering him around.] I disagree with Carol that he was faking the terror when running into the Great Hall; (p172) "...Professor Quirrell came sprinting into the hall, his turban askew and terror on his face." This description isn't ambiguous, no "look of terror" or "appeared to be terrified." IMO, that was the turning point. He had failed Voldemort at Gringotts so Voldemort had to "keep a closer watch on me..." Quirrell would have known the danger from a mountain troll, and the fact that he had been forced to admit one into the school terrified him. [Think of Ginny's terror when she realized that she might be responsible for the tragedies the next year.] After the troll, Voldemort had complete control over Quirrell. From then on the brainwashing began, and Quirrell accepted Voldemort's view that there is no evil, only power. Ravenclaw Bookworm From patnkatng at cox.net Sat Nov 22 02:36:07 2003 From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 02:36:07 -0000 Subject: Quirrell's Cause of Death was: (LV is the monkey, but who is grinding ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85669 > Katrina wrote: > I found no reference in SS/PS that Quirrel was killed. > > > Also, Voldemort himself said: > > > > "The servant died when I left his body, and I was left as weak as > > ever I had been," > > > > In GOF, in the graveyard scene, which seems to imply that one caused > > the other, though not definitively... > > > > --Arcum > > Then Carol wrote: > I found the same quote and was going to post it but you beat me to it. > The page reference is GoF 654, Am. ed., in "The Death Eaters." > Voldemort didn't have the sorceror's stone, but he must have left > Quirrell's body anyway because the disguise had been exposed and > Quirrell was no more use to him. The question, for me, is why Quirrell > died when Voldemort dispossessed him. It must, as someone in this > thread suggested, have been the unicorn blood, unless Voldemort simply > willed him to die. Or maybe he was a sort of parasite who had sucked > Quirrell's life away along with his integrity. Katrina, again: Yes, I found the reference shortly after I posted. It was on the page after I stopped looking. Figures. :P Actually, the suggestion about Quirrell either dying because Voldemort left him or from drinking Unicorn blood was from my earlier post, too. Seems to me that you're probably pretty close with your parasite description. I wouldn't expect Voldemort to care what happened to his "host." I'd bet there wasn't much left of Quirrell after Voldemort took off. From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sat Nov 22 02:58:35 2003 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 02:58:35 -0000 Subject: Quidditch commentator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85670 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dmoorehpnc" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" > wrote: > > Who do you think will get Lee Jordan's job now that he's left > > Hogwarts? The Quidditch games won't be the same without a witty > > commmentator... Any (obvious) candidates? > > > > Dmoorehpnc > Three Cheers for Creevey > Creevey! Creevey! Creevey! I think Colin Creevey would be an > excellent choice. Who worships Harry more than him? > Just think of it. A whole new way for Colin to drive Harry absolutely nuts! All those embarrassing comments Harry doesn't want others to hear... Ravenclaw Bookworm From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Sat Nov 22 03:08:45 2003 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 22:08:45 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Quirrell (WAS: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx) Message-ID: <108.28e52536.2cf02d3d@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85671 Ravenclaw bookworm: > I disagree with Carol that he was faking the terror when running > into the Great Hall; (p172) "...Professor Quirrell came sprinting > into the hall, his turban askew and terror on his face." This > description isn't ambiguous, no "look of terror" or "appeared to be > terrified." IMO, that was the turning point. He had failed > Voldemort at Gringotts so Voldemort had to "keep a closer watch on > me..." Quirrell would have known the danger from a mountain troll, > and the fact that he had been forced to admit one into the school > terrified him. [Think of Ginny's terror when she realized that she > might be responsible for the tragedies the next year.] After the > troll, Voldemort had complete control over Quirrell. From then on > the brainwashing began, and Quirrell accepted Voldemort's view that > there is no evil, only power. I always figured Voldemort was inside Quirrell's head from the first time we see him wearing the Turban at the staff table. One thing I wonder about is this passage: "You let the troll in?" "Certainly. I have a special gift with trolls--you must've seen what I did to the one in the chamber back there? --and not only did my troll fail to beat you to death....." [SS p. 289] Doesn't sound like a man who was exactly concerned for anyone's well being...at least not at this point in time. I also don't think it was a genuine faint because, remember, he let the Troll in as a diversion to see what was gaurding the stone. Unless Voldemort smacked him from the inside and told him to "wake up and get moving!" as for the terror...well, it could partly have been due to something other than we expect, but the characters most likely figured he ran into the troll and then ran to get help. As for his "change"...even HE admits it: "A foolish young man I was then, full of ridiculous ideas about good and evil" [SS p. 291] He basically says he was 'set straight' by Voldemort ~Cassie-who, personally, thinks Voldemort just happened to run across a shockingly good actor XXD~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sat Nov 22 03:30:24 2003 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 03:30:24 -0000 Subject: Quirrell (WAS: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx) In-Reply-To: <108.28e52536.2cf02d3d@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85672 Bookworm wrote: He had failed Voldemort at Gringotts so Voldemort had to "keep a closer watch on me..." Cassie wrote: I always figured Voldemort was inside Quirrell's head from the first time we see him wearing the Turban at the staff table. Bookworm: I agree. Cassie: One thing I wonder about is this passage: "You let the troll in?" "Certainly. I have a special gift with trolls--you must've seen what I did to the one in the chamber back there? --and not only did my troll fail to beat you to death....." [SS p. 289] Doesn't sound like a man who was exactly concerned for anyone's well being...at least not at this point in time. Bookworm: IMO this was bragging after the fact. From Jul 31st, when Quirrell tried to get the Stone from Gringotts, to Halloween was only three months. During that time he may have been trying to resist Voldemort. After Halloween, there were about seven months before the trio went "Through the Trapdoor" ? after their last end-of-year exam. Even if Quirrell was terrified of his actions in October, by May he would have heard enough from Voldemort to be proud of his previous actions, and not concerned about anything except Voldemort's approval. Ravenclaw Bookworm From AllieS426 at aol.com Sat Nov 22 03:38:27 2003 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 03:38:27 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85673 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "augustinapeach" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zihav" wrote: Narcissa to *know* that she's evil. I have no doubt > > Now AP: > > But Kreacher went to Narcissa when Sirius ordered him out. And she > apparently gave the information Kreacher told her about the > relationship between Harry and Sirius to at least Lucius, maybe > Voldemort himself, to help set into motion the plan that led to Harry > being lured to the MoM and Sirius' death. Now Allie again: UNLESS Kreacher went to Narcissa's house but only LUCIUS was home, and Lucius was the one who alerted the DEs. I can't remember if DD specifically said that Kreacher told Narcissa or if he just said that he went to her house. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 03:39:15 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 03:39:15 -0000 Subject: The children's future careers- Potions vs Herbology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85674 > bboy_mn: > > My theory is that Mdm. Sprout will take over Potions, Snape will cover > DADA, and after Voldemort is all sorted out, Neville will take over > Herbology. > > This is based in my believe that Potion is just applied Herbology. The > books imply two text books for potions, but the only one that is ever > reference in potions class or in relation to potions class is 'One > Thousand Herbs and Fungi'. > OTOH, bezoars and lace wing flies, to name just two potion ingredients, don't come from plants. The other Potions book you mention may well deal with animal and mineral ingredients. I do agree that if Snape is teaching DADA, Hogwarts will need a Potions teacher and it might as well be Neville--which would be a nice irony after all the trouble he's had with it. But I think he'd be happier teaching his beloved herbology. Carol From navarro198 at hotmail.com Sat Nov 22 03:59:01 2003 From: navarro198 at hotmail.com (scoutmom21113) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 03:59:01 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85675 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" wrote: > Now Allie again: > > UNLESS Kreacher went to Narcissa's house but only LUCIUS was home, > and Lucius was the one who alerted the DEs. I can't remember if DD > specifically said that Kreacher told Narcissa or if he just said that he went to her house. Bookworm: I was thinking something similar but you beat me to it - that Lucius was present when Kreacher went to Narcissa. Dumbledore said (p831, US): "But he gave Narcissa information of the sort that is very valuable to Voldemort, yet must have seemed much too trivial for Sirius to think of banning him from repeating." "Voldemort knew already, of course, that Sirius was in the Order, that you knew where he was - but Kreacher's information made him realize that the one person whom you would go to any lengths to rescue was Sirius Black." "The Malfoys ? undoubtedly on Voldemort's instructions ? had told him he must find a way of keeping Sirius out of the way once you had seen the vision of Sirius being tortured." So we know that Kreacher spoke to Narcissa, that the information got to Voldemort, and that either both Malfoys gave orders to Kreacher or both were present when either Narcissa or Lucius gave the orders to Kreacher. Either Narcissa is not a spy for Snape, or she could not prevent Lucius from finding out the details of Kreacher's visit. Or a third thought: does "The Malfoys" mean Lucius and Narcissa, as I just thought? Or does it mean Lucius and Draco? Ravenclaw Bookworm From AllieS426 at aol.com Sat Nov 22 04:04:22 2003 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 04:04:22 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's next move (Ollivander's treachery) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85676 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tigerpatronus" wrote: > > > > Barring a heretofore-unmentioned Wand Shop in Knockturn Alley, > Ollivander's is the place you go when you need a wand. All the > escapees needed wands and got them. Thus, so far, Ollivander supplied > them. > > And there is that troublesome anagram -- An Evil Lord -- for > Ollivander. > > TK -- Tigerpatronus All those notorious escaped DEs running around Diagon Alley? Wouldn't they be seen and apprehended? I don't know if 10 DE's vs. all the wizards in Diagon Alley would work out in their favor. I suppose they could have apparated inside the store, purchased wands from Ollivander, and apparated away, if he is An Evil Lord. Or, maybe they IMPERIO-d Ollivander to sell the wands, or stole them, if he's not An Evil Lord (nice anagram!). Allie From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Sat Nov 22 04:10:51 2003 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 23:10:51 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Quirrell's Cause of Death was: (LV is the monkey, but... Message-ID: <37.411137ea.2cf03bcb@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85677 In a message dated 11/21/2003 6:42:30 PM Pacific Standard Time, patnkatng at cox.net writes: > Carol wrote: > > >I found the same quote and was going to post it but you beat me to > it. > >The page reference is GoF 654, Am. ed., in "The Death Eaters." > >Voldemort didn't have the sorceror's stone, but he must have left > >Quirrell's body anyway because the disguise had been exposed and > >Quirrell was no more use to him. The question, for me, is why > Quirrell > >died when Voldemort dispossessed him. It must, as someone in this > >thread suggested, have been the unicorn blood, unless Voldemort > simply > >willed him to die. Or maybe he was a sort of parasite who had > sucked > >Quirrell's life away along with his integrity. > I think it was a combination of things. Voldemort feeding off Quirrell's 'life force', the unicorn blood, and Potter getting touchy-feely with him when he discovered Quirrell couldn't stand to be touched by him. ~Cassie~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From snapesmate at hotmail.com Sat Nov 22 04:38:12 2003 From: snapesmate at hotmail.com (snapesmate) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 04:38:12 -0000 Subject: Is Snape a pureblood?, was: Of course Snape is a Slytherin, was: Re: Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85678 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nibleswik" wrote: > Cheekyweebisom: > Slytherins are supposed to be cunning, ambitious purebloods. > > > The three traits don't automatically spell out evilness. > > Jazmyn: > > Ton Riddle was Slytherin and not a pureblood. I don't think > the sorting hat cares > > if the person is pureblood as long as they are ambitious and > cunning.. > > Me (Cheekyweebisom): > I got the impression that there were occasional halfbloods in > Slytherin. I definitely don't see it as, "Ambitious and cunning? > Step right up! We don't care about heritage anymore!" > > Cheekyweebisom Tom Riddle was also a decendant of Salazar Slytherin. I suspect that alone would have got him landed in Slytherin, unless he pulled an HP and asked to be placed in another house. All I remember of canon, none of the books said all Slytherins were evil. Ron said there wasn't a witch or wizard who went bad that wasn't in Slytherin. So, does that mean Peter Pettigrew was a Slytherin? Since DD said he made Remus prefect to help reign in Black and Potter, I assumed all 4 were Gryffindors. Peter the rat too, since I also assumed if he had been a Slytherin, he would have sucked up to a Slytherin, not a Gryffindor... From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Sat Nov 22 04:51:34 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 04:51:34 -0000 Subject: Ollivander/Wands(was-Voldemort's next move) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85679 wrote: Barring a heretofore-unmentioned Wand Shop in Knockturn Alley, Ollivander's is the place you go when you need a wand. All the escapees needed wands and got them. Thus, so far, Ollivander supplied them. And there is that troublesome anagram -- An Evil Lord -- for Ollivander. ARYA NOW: Granted in PS, Hagrid does say, "Just Ollivanders left now--only place for wands, Ollivanders, and yeh gotta have the best wand." But Hagrid says lots of off things and this could mean it's the only place in Diagon Alley, in London or just in the UK. But, obviously, there *are* other places to go for wands outside of London/Uk. Viktor Krum had a Gregorovitch wand and Fleur had one that certainly wasn't made by Ollivander. Not to mention the fact that any witch or wizard might just make their own wands. In FB, (softcover, p5) it describes how one might leave an offereing to placate Bowtruckles in order to gain access to a tree for wand wood. Actually, a place off Knockturn Alley with a business in selling used wands to folks who've "mysteriously" lost theirs, sounds just about right. If there's a demand, there's got to be a market for it. Arya From patientx3 at aol.com Sat Nov 22 04:53:07 2003 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 04:53:07 -0000 Subject: Draco Malfoy question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85680 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Shannon" wrote: > I unfortunately have not been reading the posts for too long so >maybe this was already discussed but my query is there are upcoming >plot points being discussed in regards to Malfoy and I just want to >know why Dumbledore would allow him to continue at the school, >especially when his father is a comfirmed and arrested Death Eater. >Wouldn't keeping someone like that at a school where there are other >children pose such a risk their safety that you would have to assume >Dumbledore would expell the children of known Death Eaters now the >Voldemort is back? Lisa wrote: >A couple of points: 1)to expel Draco would mean expelling children of >all known DEs, which would likely be a significant portion of >Slytherin House. 2)DD has emphatically stressed the importance of >CHOICE over circumstances of birth, and so to expel students simple >b/c of blood relationships would, I think, not be palatable to him. HunterGreen: I agree with Lisa that that would be very much out of DD's character to expel a student because of something their father did. Also, that seems like a guarenteed way to turn a *potential* DE into a definite DE. If he expelled all children of DE's then even the ones who were leaning toward NOT falling in their father's footsteps, probably would because without school they wouldn't have many other options/would be spending MORE time with their evil families, not to mention wanting revenge on DD for kicking them out of school for something they have no control over. Also, there was a similar thread about this in July (if anyone is interested), it starts with msg #67852. -HunterGreen From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 05:42:46 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 05:42:46 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy)--or not In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85681 Mandy wrote: > I don't think JKR would be afraid to included a relationship between > a married character and another. Or have a child as the offspring of > and extramarital affaire. Personally I would love to find out that > Draco is not really Lucius' son, if only to see Lucius go down. But > again: pure speculation. ;-) Considering how closely Draco resembles his father (at least physically), I don't think it's likely. We're constantly told about his pale blond hair and pointy chin looking just like Lucius's. IIRC, they have the same cold grey eyes that are sometimes narrowed maliciously. I have a feeling that Draco will be less of a lazy spoiled brat and more of a genuine menace--his father's son--in the upcoming books. Also Narcissa's name is still on the Black family tapestry--maybe not just because she dutifully married a pure blood. I have a feeling that she's a Dark Witch like Bellatrix only not so belligerent. Maybe she brewed the poisons that Lucius has hidden in his basement. And she definitely communicated whatever she learned about Sirius from the egregious Kreacher directly to her husband, who passed it on to Voldemort. I do think we'll hear more from Narcissa, but I don't think she's a good guy. And if I'm right about her, she'd better steer clear of Snape unless she can defend herself from legilmency because he'll find out everything she knows. OTOH, he'd also be well-advised to steer clear of her. Narcissa's name suggests self-love (the Narcissus legend) and the Narcissus, as Snape the Potions master would know, is a poisonous plant (though not deadly). The name comes from the Greek word narkao, to benumb. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 06:27:19 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 06:27:19 -0000 Subject: Stellar Brothers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85683 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ghinghapuss" wrote: > > Iggy here: > > One would also be inclined to wonder if Regulus was an Animagus as > well, and whether his alternate form was a lion. > > Now me: > I have read somewhere here that Crookshanks could be Regulus' > Animagus form, and the way he is hiding from Voldemort. The only > argument I remember to support this is that Crookshanks is described > as being a little lion, and he and Snuffles get on so well. > > Sorry I can't quote a post number. > Perhaps someone else remembers who posted that idea. > > Mandy Actually, he was described as a very large cat or quite a small tiger. And though he got along well with Snuffles, he tried to kill Scabbers. I don't think he'd care much for Regulus, who was an "idiot" (Sirius's word) and a coward (the Cowardly Lion?) But since Regulus has been dead for fifteen years, I'm not sure that it matters. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 07:10:21 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 07:10:21 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Organ Grinder (Fair is foul and foul is fair.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85684 > Clef wrote: > > > DD is so good, he seems too good to be true, which means he > probably is. WS isn't kidding when he said fair is foul and foul is > fair. He also calls Riddle, "Lord Voldemort" (CoS Am. vers. pg.329 > and on), and as Harry pointed out to Snape in book 5 only DE's call > him "Lord Voldemort." Or maybe book 2 was a slip up, b/c I can't find > DD saying it again in any subsequant books. But then, if DD is above > Riddle, he wouldn't call him his Lord, would he? > > Berit: > > Just a little clarification: The DE's call their master "the Dark > Lord", not "Lord Voldemort". they respect him/are too afraid of him > to call him by his real name. Bellatrix went berserk when Harry dared > to say his name in MoM... Only Dumbledore and Harry calls him "(Lord) > Voldemort" (in OoP others like Hermione start doing it as well). So, > DD saying "Lord Voldemort" is not really an argument for > him "sympathizing" with Voldemort... Why is he using the > title "Lord"? I don't know; maybe he's just being polite :-) He > always insists on Harry addressing Snape as "Professor"... The DEs (and Snape) refer to LV in the third person as the Dark Lord; the DEs address him directly as "my lord" (as Snape also must have done in his late teens and early twenties). Dumbledore and Harry (and young Tom Riddle) use Lord Voldemort or Voldemort in the third person. I don't remember Harry using any name at all in directly addressing Voldemort, but Dumbledore calls him Tom, reminding him of his origins, a point I'll return to in a minute. To speak of someone in the third person as Lord so and so (for example Lord Byron or Lord Tennyson) is not at all the same as addressing him as "my lord" in person. One is a simple recognition of a title (like referring to Elizabeth II as Queen Elizabeth), the other is an acknowledgment of superior power or social status (like addressing the queen as "your majesty," which few Americans would do--I can't speak for the English). Granted, Voldemort's lordship is self-created, but his power over the Death Eaters is real (as his treatment of Avery, Rookwood, and Pettigrew shows). Even his "slippery friend" Malfoy calls him "my lord" to his face. For Dumbledore to speak of him as Lord Voldemort when he's not present is not to speak of him as *his* lord but only to acknowledge his power. To call him "Tom" to his face is something else again. It strips him of power and reduces him to his muggle-born, orphaned boyhood. There's something of pity and regret there, but also of putting Voldemort in his place, as if he's saying, "I know who and what you really are, and I know how you can be defeated." Carol, who doesn't think Dumbledore is the Organ Grinder From snapesmate at hotmail.com Sat Nov 22 08:59:29 2003 From: snapesmate at hotmail.com (snapesmate) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 08:59:29 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's next move (Ollivander's treachery) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85685 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tigerpatronus" > wrote: > > > > And there is that troublesome anagram -- An Evil Lord -- for > > Ollivander. > > > > TK -- Tigerpatronus > > I suppose they could have apparated inside the store, purchased wands > from Ollivander, and apparated away, if he is An Evil Lord. Or, > maybe they IMPERIO-d Ollivander to sell the wands, or stole them, if > he's not An Evil Lord (nice anagram!). > > Allie Another anagram for Ollivander is "naive droll". Droll nowadays means "amusing in a wry or odd way". However in early 17th century usage (Middle Dutch) it meant imp or goblin. Naive nowadays means extremely simple and trusting: having or showing an excessively simple and trusting view of the world and human nature, often as a result of youth and inexperience. However, in good old 17th century usage (French, Latin, English) it meant "born"! hhhmmm.... born goblin? Lynnette, who thinks Snape is a good guy, even if he is not a nice guy! From b5_mark at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 09:09:23 2003 From: b5_mark at yahoo.com (Mark) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 01:09:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031122090923.20788.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85686 Sorry to bother you, but I never really read this group anymore. I'm not sure how to go about unsubscribing, but if you could help me out, it would save us both a few extra kilobytes of net traffic... Thanks. p.s. The group is great, I just don't have the time... __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/ From snapesmate at hotmail.com Sat Nov 22 09:30:45 2003 From: snapesmate at hotmail.com (snapesmate) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 09:30:45 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] In-Reply-To: <20031122090923.20788.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85687 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Mark wrote: > Sorry to bother you, but I never really read this > group anymore. I'm not sure how to go about > unsubscribing Unsubscribe: HPforGrownups-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com From LWalshETAL at aol.com Fri Nov 21 23:16:22 2003 From: LWalshETAL at aol.com (LWalshETAL at aol.com) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 18:16:22 EST Subject: Accents in Audio Versions of Books Message-ID: <1ec.13cd92d0.2ceff6c6@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85688 > Robyn wrote: > In listening to Jim Dale read OoP American version), I noted that > he gave Bellatrix Lestrange what sounds to me like a French > accent. Is there any canon to support that, or is Dale > extrapolating an accent from her French-sounding surname? In the German version of GoF, Rufus Beck gives Rita Skeeter (Rita Kimmkorn) a very broad American accent, with insertions of "Ya know," and an occasional American English word. It has been interesting to me to speculate as to why. Personally, I think it is a rather blatant parody of Americans (chiefly GIs in Germany, who often live there for several years, but who learn little German. It does give a very interesting twist to the Rita character. Laura Walsh LWalshETAL at aol.com From eloiseherisson at aol.com Sat Nov 22 12:20:44 2003 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 07:20:44 EST Subject: Is Snape a pureblood?, was: Of course Snape is a Slytherin, was: Re: Snape Message-ID: <10.38a3de8a.2cf0ae9c@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85689 Snapesmate: >Tom Riddle was also a decendant of Salazar Slytherin. I suspect that >alone would have got him landed in Slytherin, unless he pulled an HP >and asked to be placed in another house. All I remember of canon, >none of the books said all Slytherins were evil. Ron said there >wasn't a witch or wizard who went bad that wasn't in Slytherin. Eloise: Actually, this was Hagrid in Diagon Alley answering Harry's questions, just after his first encounter with Draco. This being the case, it has been used as evidence that *Sirius* was a Slytherin as at that point, Hagrid believes that it was Sirius who betrayed the Potters and murdered Peter and the Muggles. Some would argue that this is just Hagrid speaking very loosely. OTOH, given what we now know of Sirius' family, then his being sorted into Slytherin isn't ludicrous. Of course there are counter arguments. Sirius hated his family and their values, so he may well have been sorted into another house and as you say below, the idea that Lupin was made a prefect to help rein in his friends might also imply that they were all in the same house. It's not conclusive, though. Snapesmate: >So, does that mean Peter Pettigrew was a Slytherin? Eloise: Well, no, since at that stage Hagrid thought that Peter was the innocent victim and did not know he had been the Potter's secret keeper. Snapesmate: Since DD said he >made Remus prefect to help reign in Black and Potter, I assumed all 4 >were Gryffindors. Peter the rat too, since I also assumed if he had >been a Slytherin, he would have sucked up to a Slytherin, not a >Gryffindor... Eloise: In the Shrieking Shack, the point is made that Peter would suck up to whoever had power. I tend to think the four friends *were* all in Gryffindor, but the arguments for their being in the four different houses are also strong. ~Eloise [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From templerichmond at earthlink.net Fri Nov 21 04:15:02 2003 From: templerichmond at earthlink.net (canismajorette) Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 04:15:02 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? Lost Horizon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85690 CM wrote: > > Don't we hear in the first few pages that Sirius has lately been > > in Tibet? bboy_mn: > The reference to Sirius being in Tibet came from Kingsly Shacklbolt, > the Auror in charge of finding Sirius. But Kingsly knows that Sirius > is indeed living in his old family home in London. So, to keep the > rest of the Ministy off guard, he say that Sirius is rumored to be > in Tibet which is a long way away, and in an area where he doesn't > pose any immediate danger to the UK wizard world. > > However, in previous books we know that Sirius was in hiding outside > of the UK, and was sending messages using huge colorfull tropical > birds. My best guess for that would have been Mylasia and Thailand, > or possibly central Africa. > > I don't know enough about the geography and ecology of Tibet to know > if tropcial birds exist there. >From CM: Yes, I remember now. Tropical birds could live in some of the strange valleys way up in the Himalayas. These valleys go so deep that they are subtropical. Wasn't this the kind of world described in James Hilton's Paradise Lost? It was a hermitage valley in Tibet, where people lived very long life spans, and there was no strife, and so on. A place idyllic, and tropical, even though embedded way deep in the Himalayas, if I correctly recall. Not Paradise Lost! It was Lost Horizon! That's it! That's the novel in which a tropical valley in Tibet is described. There was film made about this some years back. Paradise Lost is Milton, a whole different thing! Deep trouble, in fact. But Lost Horizons describes a world of peace and spiritual understanding deep within the Himalayas. And somehow, by virtue of its sheer drop, it manages to get so far down that it becomes tropical, with extraordinary flora and fauna, and snow capped peaks up above. So, in literature there does exist such a world from which exotic birds might take flight. From youinfocus at yahoo.ca Sat Nov 22 04:06:56 2003 From: youinfocus at yahoo.ca (Jodie McNamara) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 04:06:56 -0000 Subject: The Pensieve Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85691 There is a photography site where digital photographers can submit their best photos for a daily contest. Yesterday's winner in the "Open" category is called "Fountain" and it appears to be of a pensieve! It is EXACTLY what I imagined the pensieve would look like! So so beautiful... Anyone who wants to see go here: http://www.bestfoto.com/Archives/POTDdisplay.asp?PIC=112003O%2Ejpg From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Sat Nov 22 08:58:16 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: 22 Nov 2003 08:58:16 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldemort's next move (Ollivander's treachery) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1069491500.8347.0.camel@Bujold_RH> No: HPFGUIDX 85692 TK -- Tigerpatronus: > Barring a heretofore-unmentioned Wand Shop in Knockturn Alley, > Ollivander's is the place you go when you need a wand. All the > escapees needed wands and got them. Thus, so far, Ollivander > supplied them. Angel: There's at least two other wand makers around, and Ollivanders isn't the only one, he's just the best. From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Sat Nov 22 09:01:37 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: 22 Nov 2003 09:01:37 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1069491700.8347.4.camel@Bujold_RH> No: HPFGUIDX 85693 Amura wrote: > I was thinking Sirius might hide in Bermuda :P Now Katrina adds: > Couldn't have been Bermuda. There aren't any large tropical birds there, either. DDT and imported livestock (notably pigs) killed them all decades ago. I don't think it's tropical enough, either. Hmmm. Must be further south. . . What about Australia? They have some big, flashy birds there, too. We know the WW is in Australia from QTTA. It's a possibility. >>> Angel considers: What about Madagascar - It's a haven for exotic plants and wildlife. A lot of the botanic gardens in the UK, particularly Kew, have a Madagascar appeal going, because so much of the Flora and Fauna are novel, and used in native medicine. (I add the botanic gardens bit, because JKR is known to frequent them.) From JMANDES at HOTMAIL.COM Sat Nov 22 10:52:21 2003 From: JMANDES at HOTMAIL.COM (slimjim_06109) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:52:21 -0000 Subject: poll on sirius's death Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85694 In response to voting "other", I believe JKR should keep him dead, make Harry grieve and all that, but have Sirius sort of be a guiding force to Harry, a second conscience if you will, telling him if someone needs his help and what to do in sticky situations. "slimjim_06109" From zanelupin at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 15:34:30 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:34:30 -0000 Subject: Question on SS/PS Chapter 7 Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85695 Hello Everyone, My bleary eyes can take no more searching through old posts to see if this has been brought up before, so I'm going to just ask you all. On p 122 of the US Paperback Edition of SS: "And now there were only three people left to be sorted." ***** Dean Thomas and Lisa Turpin are sorted after this statement. Next Ron becomes a Gryffindor. And *then* Blaise Zabini becomes a Slytherin. If I'm not mistaken that's four, not three. Is this a Flint, or maybe it was meant to say there were three left other than Ron to be sorted? Maybe no one matters to Harry after Ron, so Blaise Zabini doesn't count? I know it's a minor point, but there it is, KathyK, who needs to stop staring at her computer screen now From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sat Nov 22 15:55:36 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:55:36 -0000 Subject: Question on SS/PS Chapter 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85696 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" wrote: > Hello Everyone, > > My bleary eyes can take no more searching through old posts to see > if this has been brought up before, so I'm going to just ask you all. > > On p 122 of the US Paperback Edition of SS: > > "And now there were only three people left to be sorted." > > ***** > Dean Thomas and Lisa Turpin are sorted after this statement. Next > Ron becomes a Gryffindor. And *then* Blaise Zabini becomes a > Slytherin. > > If I'm not mistaken that's four, not three. > > Is this a Flint, or maybe it was meant to say there were three left > other than Ron to be sorted? Maybe no one matters to Harry after > Ron, so Blaise Zabini doesn't count? > > I know it's a minor point, but there it is, > > KathyK, who needs to stop staring at her computer screen now In the british edition Dean wasn't mentioned. That was changed for the American. I think this was a Flint from the American editor, because if you look closely, there weren't three people left after Harry's sorting, but three people after Harry spoke with Percy. That means Dean was sorted before Lisa Turpin, and wasn't mentioned (like Crabbe and Goyle) Hickengruendler From annemehr at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 15:57:57 2003 From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:57:57 -0000 Subject: Question on SS/PS Chapter 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85697 Kathy K wrote: > My bleary eyes can take no more searching through old posts to see > if this has been brought up before, so I'm going to just ask you all. > > On p 122 of the US Paperback Edition of SS: > > "And now there were only three people left to be sorted." > > ***** > Dean Thomas and Lisa Turpin are sorted after this statement. Next > Ron becomes a Gryffindor. And *then* Blaise Zabini becomes a > Slytherin. > > If I'm not mistaken that's four, not three. I do remember this coming up quite some months ago, but since I can't imagine what would be a good keyword to search for this, I'm not at all surprised you couldn't find it! Turns out, in the UK editions, only Lisa, Ron, and Blaise are sorted after that statement. In the US, Dean Thomas' sorting was inserted here (and the fact that he's black is mentioned), but the editors failed to catch the need to change the number of people left to be sorted! And, who knows why they made the change? If you're interested, the HP Lexicon lists all the differences between the UK and US editions. Annemehr From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 17:49:17 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 17:49:17 -0000 Subject: Alternate to Unsubscribe In-Reply-To: <20031122090923.20788.qmail@web41107.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85698 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Mark wrote: > Sorry to bother you, but I never really read this > group anymore. I'm not sure how to go about > unsubscribing, but if you could help me out, it would > save us both a few extra kilobytes of net traffic... > > Thanks. > > p.s. The group is great, I just don't have the time... Just a thought. Instead of Unsubscribing, why not just set your group preferences to 'No Email', then you can come and read the group at the groups website - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/ whenever it's convinient or never. But if you do get a sudden urge to see what's going on, it's always there and waiting, but at the same time, you avoid all those post clogging up your email box. In the Blue title bar near the top of the page, over on the right hand side, is a link 'Edit My Membership'. Select that link and set your 'Message Delivery' preferences to either 'Special Notices' or 'No Email'. Same as- http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/join Just a thought. bboy_mn From jwcpgh at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 17:52:01 2003 From: jwcpgh at yahoo.com (jwcpgh) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 17:52:01 -0000 Subject: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85699 So I was thinking about Tonks's wonderful defense of Lupin posts, and a thought occurred to me. (Paramedics weren't necessary but it was a near thing.) The night of the Shrieking Shack incident in PoA, Snape, as we know, appears in the Shack. He tells the group that he found out what was happening when he went into Remus's office to give him his monthly wolfsbane potion and saw the Marauder's Map. (PoA p.358 US). As soon as he grasps the situation, he goes tearing off to the Shack. But wait a minute-what about the potion? Why didn't Snape bring it with him? He knew that Remus would be a lethal threat to HRH if he didn't take the stuff ASAP. (Yeah, Sirius too, but of course that wouldn't be an issue for Snape.) Severus had no way of knowing whether Remus had already transformed or not. If he hadn't, he might at any moment, and really needed that potion. And if Snape were at all concerned about HRH, he would have tried to prevent their coming to harm. If, on the other hand, Remus had already transformed, what did he think he could do against a werewolf and a murderer? Why didn't he get some backup? I can only infer that Snape was so eager to nail Sirius and Remus that he didn't really care if HRH were killed in the process. Doesn't say much for our boy Sevvie, does it? And then he has the nerve to paint himself as HRH's selfless rescuer. Nice, Snape, really nice. Laura, wondering who Snape would have gone after first if he had been in the MoM that night-Sirius or Bellatrix? From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 17:55:17 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 17:55:17 -0000 Subject: Accents in Audio Versions of Books In-Reply-To: <1ec.13cd92d0.2ceff6c6@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85700 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, LWalshETAL at a... wrote: > > Robyn wrote: > > In listening to Jim Dale read OoP American version), I noted that > > he gave Bellatrix Lestrange what sounds to me like a French > > accent. > > Laura: > > In the German version of GoF, Rufus Beck gives Rita Skeeter > (Rita Kimmkorn) a very broad American accent, with insertions > of "Ya know," and an occasional American English word. It has > been interesting to me to speculate as to why. ...edited.. > > Laura Walsh bboy_mn: I wonder if it isn't just a case of running out of unique voices. With so many and such diversified characters, it must be very difficult for one reader to come up with distinctive voices for each character. Remember, it's a lot easier to imagine a voice in your head than it is to vocalize it. I have a mental image of the voices of all character, but couldn't speak in any of those voices to save my life. It certainly would be much easier if a team of people read the books our loud; like and old radio play, say two men and one woman. Just a thought. bboy_mn From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Sat Nov 22 18:27:55 2003 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 13:27:55 EST Subject: Unicorn Blood (WAS: Re: Quirrell's Cause of Death) Message-ID: <128.35c2daf9.2cf104ab@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85701 Carol: The question, for me, is why Quirrell > died when Voldemort dispossessed him. It must, as someone in this > thread suggested, have been the unicorn blood, > Katrina, again: > > > > Actually, the suggestion about Quirrell either dying because > Voldemort left him or from drinking Unicorn blood was from my > earlier post, too. I have a (probably not) new theory. Maybe it was the reverse. Maybe the unicorn blood kept him alive. Ok... Somewhere in GoF (can't find the book ;_;) Voldemort says that he had to live off animals who would soon die because they could not handle possession. I would imagine that a human (especially a wizard) could handle possession longer, but the possessor would still be 'feeding' off them/their life. Perhaps the unicorn blood was really meant to replenish Quirrell, Voldie's host, so that Voldie could stay inside him longer. I think Voldemort was killing him from the moment he possessed him. By the time we reach the end of the book the supply of unicorn blood has run out and/or the 'poison' has taken effect on Quirrell. Also, if I'm right and Voldemort was feeding on Quirrell's 'life energy', maybe before the end he had only been doing it bit by bit...taking just enough so that he could survive. Then, at the end when he wants to talk to Potter and after when he gets enraged he uses up Quirrell's life. In other words--sucked him dry. ~Cassie-hoping that makes sense~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From zanelupin at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 18:37:57 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 18:37:57 -0000 Subject: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85702 Laura: >The night of the Shrieking Shack incident in PoA, Snape, as we know, appears in the Shack. He tells the group that he found out what was happening when he went into Remus's office to give him his monthly wolfsbane potion and saw the Marauder's Map. (PoA p.358 US). As soon as he grasps the situation, he goes tearing off to the Shack. But wait a minute-what about the potion? Why didn't Snape bring it with him? He knew that Remus would be a lethal threat to HRH if he didn't take the stuff ASAP.< KathyK: But Snape didn't know HRH were there until he arrived at the Shrieking Shack, or at least until he found Harry's invisibility cloak. He says he saw Lupin running off down the passage to the Shack and then disappearing. The Trio and Sirius were already off the map. He only knew Lupin was up to something and suspected it had to do with Sirius. Snape was in the room, though, throughout Lupin's explanation of MWPP's experience at school with Lupin being a werewolf and the others becoming animagi. And who knows how much he heard before sneaking into the room? So he was able to piece a lot of things together while Lupin spoke. So he didn't have any reason to worry about protecting the Trio becuase he didn't know they were there at first. Laura: >If, on the other hand, Remus had already transformed, what did he think he could do against a werewolf and a murderer? Why didn't he get some backup? >I can only infer that Snape was so eager to nail Sirius and Remus that he didn't really care if HRH were killed in the process. Doesn't say much for our boy Sevvie, does it? And then he has the nerve to paint himself as HRH's selfless rescuer. Nice, Snape, really nice.< KathyK: He could still paint himself as the rescuer because once he was conscious, he *did* deliver Black to Fudge, thus protecting everyone from a convicted murderer. About the wolfsbane thing...Lupin didn't transform until they'd left the Shrieking Shack. There are different theories as to why this was so. But whatever the reason, maybe Snape knew Lupin wasn't going to be in werewolf form yet and thought he had ample time to take care of Lupin and Black. He didn't anticipate HRH being there and Lupin's long drawn out explanations. He didn't anticipate the Trio knocking him out, either. Or maybe he was hoping Lupin would have already transformed. Then he could kill Lupin and it would be self defense. >Laura, wondering who Snape would have gone after first if he had >been in the MoM that night-Sirius or Bellatrix?< KathyK, thinking that is a very interesting question From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 22 13:31:45 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 13:31:45 -0000 Subject: Why do you like Harry Potter? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85703 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "shanti_50130" wrote: > > To me, to compare Harry Potter to LOTR does no justice to either work, > and allows me to illustrate why I like HP better. > > Tolkein has vivid descriptions in his works. But for my own taste, > they are TOO vivid. He describes the moss on the trees with a > minuteness that removes all possiblilty of imagination. I know what > Treebeard looks like because Tolkein told me, down to every last twig > and leaf. And in the process of telling me, he uses big, ponderous, > old-fashioned descriptive adjectives, phrases, and clauses that are > sometimes difficult to read. Of course, it adds somewhat to the > flavor of the book--one feels as though one is reading an historical > account of events. But to me it makes it more dry and less enjoyable > to read than HP. > Geoff: Allow me to disagree with you. I have commented on more than one occasion that I draw parallels between LOTR and HP, not comparisons. (I can't quote message numbers because I am away from home at the momemnt and have the numbers on file 100 miles away and it will take me an age to try to track them through an archive search). In LOTR, you /are/ in effect reading a historical account of events. The first three ages of Middle Earth have covered about 7000-7500 years of ancient history and the beginning of the Fourth Age at the end of ROTK is still ancient history to us. Hence, characters speak in old ways, life styles are historical to us and it gives an ambience of antiquity to matters. After all, if we read the letters and documents of, say, the time of Elizabeth I, we would sense the same feel of distance and remoteness. One of the things which excited me (as a Maths fan mark you!) when I did GCE O-levels at 16 was that, in Latin, we were working with a book actually written by Julius Caesar himself. HP is set at the end of the 20th century. Harry, in addition to his wizard studies, lives in a world of comprehensive schools, Tube trains, luggage trolleys at Kings Cross and visits to the Zoo. So, the writing reflects that. It is modern in style, snappy, brisk and easy to read - though it does keep a small army of enthusiasts busy in analysing the position of every full stop and semi-colon . We can surely read Shakespeare and H G Wells, Caesar and Isaac Asimov without having to choose between them, so why should we have to make choices between books like LOTR and HP? I like children's books (second childhood I believe) and some fantasy books and refuse to give up Tolkien, J K Rowling, C S Lewis or Alan Garner just to keep in with the norm. Geoff From aiphmmw at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 16:04:20 2003 From: aiphmmw at yahoo.com (Nicole) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:04:20 -0000 Subject: Neville the Wizard Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85704 Hi Everyone, Since this my first post I will first introduce myself. My name is Nicole, I am 29 and live in Philadelphia. Second I will try not to offend anyone. As for Neville...... When Harry purchased his wand at Ollivanders it was explained to him that each wand choses the wizard (SS pg 82), and that you will never get such good results with another wizzard's wand (SS pg 84). My theory is that since we did not know that the wand Neville used was his Fathers that he was just a squib-like wizard with an inclination towards herbology. I think that his Grandmother wanted Neville to be great like his parents so she passed on his fathers wand instead of taking him the traditional route and letting the wand choose him. When he finally gained some confidence and got really ticked off because of what the DE's did to his parents he was able to focus more (he still had trouble because it wasn't his perfect fit) and actually produce results with the wand. As for Snape..... I love the theory that he was in love with Lily. The fact that he hated Jmes so much is not only because of the taunts and crap, but because someone as good as Lily ended up with James. (Even though in OOTP Sirius and Lupin attributed his actions to youth.). As far as the DADA position I think the reason that Dumbledore doesn't put Snape there is because LV and LM would expect little dark wizards to start pouring out of Hogwarts. Instead of teaching them to defend he would in essence teach them the actual dark arts and this is what they would expect from a loyal DE. I think Dumbledore is just protecting Snape. I think in the end Snape is trusted by Dumbledore and should be trusted by the rest. (As Hermione is always saying) Sorry if I went on long..... As a side note. I have been watching you guys for about a week. You guys are the most kind and respectful people I have ever encountered on a group. I respect all of your opinions and enjoy the heck out of being part of this group. Nicole From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 22 16:22:14 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:22:14 -0000 Subject: Defending Ron WAS Re: Hermione In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85705 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Carol: > One small addition: It's always Ron, not Hermione, whose mentioned by > the narrator as Harry's best friend (usually when he's missing them > during his summers with the Dursleys). Most notably it's Ron, not > Hermione, whom Harry is assigned to rescue in the Second Task of the > Tri-Wizard Tournament. The "thing he would miss most" is his "Wheezy." > (It's Viktor Krum who would miss "Hermowninny.") > Geoff: I think that, when you are the age of Harry and Ron, you are only just beginning to focus on serious relationships with girls. Male to male bonding is something which happens at this age and continues into adult life. If you read C S Lewis' "The Four Loves", this is one of the group he discusses. It's not sexual, it's what you might call the man-to-man thing, shared interests (sport, Quidditch, musics, hobbies etc). I still find it useful to have a male friend to whom I can talk freely and I have had friends and colleagues in the past who have used me as a safety valve or a sounding board. Geoff From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Sat Nov 22 17:18:03 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: 22 Nov 2003 17:18:03 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1069521487.9035.6.camel@Bujold_RH> No: HPFGUIDX 85706 On Sat, 2003-11-22 at 17:52, jwcpgh wrote: So I was thinking about Tonks's wonderful defense of Lupin posts, and a thought occurred to me. (Paramedics weren't necessary but it was a near thing.) The night of the Shrieking Shack incident in PoA, Snape, as we know, appears in the Shack. He tells the group that he found out what was happening when he went into Remus's office to give him his monthly wolfsbane potion and saw the Marauder's Map. (PoA p.358 US). As soon as he grasps the situation, he goes tearing off to the Shack. But wait a minute-what about the potion? Why didn't Snape bring it with him? Angel adds: I'm sure that the potion has to be drunk before it stops smoking. It's earlier in the story. We don't know what makes it stop smoking, but it might have become ineffectual by the time that it gets to the shack. I'm guessing that he saw the non-smoking goblet, and panicked. (need to re-read PoA) AotN From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Sat Nov 22 21:14:57 2003 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:14:57 -0500 Subject: Identifying the Put-Outer Message-ID: <28CABF6C.031C661D.4B073798@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85707 I don't think this question has been asked of OoP yet, but there's always the possibility it was. If it had, I'll iron my hands. OoP, Chapter Three: page 58 (American): "Got it," he muttered, raising what looked like a silver cigarette lighter into the air and clicking it. The nearest streetlamp went out with a pop. He clicked the unlighter again; the next lamp went out. He kept clicking until every lamp in the square was extinguished and the only light in the square came from curtained windows and the sickle moon overhead. "Borrowed it from Dumbledore," growled Moody, pocketing the Put-Outer. My question is this: how did Harry know it was the Put-Outer? We usually learn about things like that from Harry's POV and nowhere in that area did anyone mention the Put-Outers name. Are we just supposed to assume Harry just *knew* the name? Oryomai --Who would've posted this sooner, but had a four hour musical workshop this morning (Yeah Kiss Me, Kate!). From eloiseherisson at aol.com Sat Nov 22 21:48:46 2003 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:48:46 EST Subject: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives? Message-ID: <1c4.120eb4ee.2cf133be@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85708 KathyK: >But Snape didn't know HRH were there until he arrived at the >Shrieking Shack, or at least until he found Harry's invisibility >cloak. He says he saw Lupin running off down the passage to the >Shack and then disappearing. The Trio and Sirius were already off >the map. He only knew Lupin was up to something and suspected it >had to do with Sirius. Absolutely. Snape has thought all along that Lupin was in league with Sirius. Though the instant he saw the invisibility cloak, he must have known he would find at least Harry there. Kathy:K; >Snape was in the room, though, throughout Lupin's explanation of >MWPP's experience at school with Lupin being a werewolf and the >others becoming animagi. And who knows how much he heard before >sneaking into the room? So he was able to piece a lot of things >together while Lupin spoke. Eloise: For those who haven't read it, I must highly recommend Amanda's message, 15233, on 'What Snape Knew and When'. In this she analyses exactly what we *know* that Snape knows from the Shrieking Shack incident, although, as you say, he might have heard more before entering the room. I doubt he did hear more, however. He stayed disguised under Harry's invisibility cloak for some time. Why would he listen outside the door as well? KathyK: >So he didn't have any reason to worry about protecting the Trio >becuase he didn't know they were there at first. Eloise: Indeed, he didn't. Laura: >>If, on the other hand, Remus had already transformed, what did he >>think he could do against a werewolf and a murderer? Why didn't he >>get some backup? Eloise: Quite. He fouled up there. Not only did he not get help, but her went off to do what he could, *knowing* that Lupin was potentially unsafe. We could suggest it was arrogance on his part. I suspect that it has to do with a deep seated need to prove himself. Laura: >>I can only infer that Snape was so eager to nail Sirius and Remus >>that he didn't really care if HRH were killed in the process. >>Doesn't say much for our boy Sevvie, does it? And then he has the >>nerve to paint himself as HRH's selfless rescuer. Nice, Snape, >>really nice. Eloise: As has been pointed out, Severus didn't know that the trio were there because the Shrieking Shack was off the map. I am certain that he *did* believe that Sirius was the traitor and that Lupin was in league with him. We have evidence that he has been arguing with Dumbledore over this very point. He is very good at putting two and two together but with insufficient data, he was, in this case, totally wrong. So yes, he believes that he *has* rescued Harry from Sirius and James, we now have confirmed, *was* a bit of an arrogant prat after all, at least before he became Head Boy (I'm dying to find out how that came about). I have a little sympathy for Snape's viewpoint. Well, I have a lot. I'm a Snapefan, after all. ;-) And after it all, when Snape regains consciousness, what does he do? He conjurs *stretchers* that's what, and makes sure that the students whod are in his charge get back to the safety of the school. He doesn't even take the revenge on Sirius that we might expect (although I've written on the less magnanimous aspects of that in the past). KathyK: >He could still paint himself as the rescuer because once he was >conscious, he *did* deliver Black to Fudge, thus protecting everyone >from a convicted murderer. Eloise: Yes. he did the right thing. I have questioned before why he didn't just summon the Dementors, as he had suggested before that he might. One theory I have is that the Dementors had been given such a fright by Harry's Patronus that they just didn't want to know (I take it that Snape didn't actually witness the Patronus). The other is that he wanted to be *seen* to do the right thing. In a way there was more cachet in delivering Sirius alive, sadistically more satisfaction in Sirius hearing the sentence being pronounced upon him than in the Kiss being administered on him whilst still unconscious. I have questioned whether Snape actually *knew* the state of play at that point. Would he *know* that Sirius was just unconscious? Might he not assume, seeing the unconscious bodies and the Dementors gliding away that *all* of the others had been Kissed. I think it might have been a nasty moment for him. KathyK: >About the wolfsbane thing...Lupin didn't transform until they'd left >the Shrieking Shack. There are different theories as to why this >was so. But whatever the reason, maybe Snape knew Lupin wasn't >going to be in werewolf form yet and thought he had ample time to >take care of Lupin and Black. He didn't anticipate HRH being there >and Lupin's long drawn out explanations. He didn't anticipate the >Trio knocking him out, either. Eloise: Snape is a highly competent wizard. No, he would have no reason to suspect that the trio (whom he didn't even know were there before he arrived) would be capable of knocking him out (and it was a matter of good fortune that they did). I am curious as to what state he thought Lupin might be in, though. Of course, he has already met him in werewolf form. Maybe the decision to meet him again, this time as a fully fledged wizard, was partly an attempt to exorcise old ghosts. No James to mess things up by resuing him this time. Either he'd prevail on his own merits or he'd fail. Either way, his own worth would be proven. KathyK: >Or maybe he was hoping Lupin would have already transformed. Then >he could kill Lupin and it would be self defense. Eloise: I'm sure this was in his mind. >>Laura, wondering who Snape would have gone after first if he had >>been in the MoM that night-Sirius or Bellatrix?< Eloise: Bellatrix. By this stage, Snape knows who's on which side. He may still hate Sirius, out of habit, if nothing else, but he knows it was not he who betrayed the Potters. I do not believe for one moment that he would have pursued a personal vendetta against Sirius, knowing him to be innocent, knowing it to be against Dumbledore's wishes. Bit of an irony, though, isn't it? Snape's been taunting Sirius all this time because he hasn't been able to go out, risking his life for the order like Snape has. But when the confontation comes, it's Snape who has to hide away so that his cover isn't blown and it's Sirius who not only risks, but gives his life for the Order. ~Eloise [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 22 23:42:11 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 23:42:11 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: <1069491700.8347.4.camel@Bujold_RH> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85709 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Angel Moules wrote: > > Amura wrote: > > I was thinking Sirius might hide in Bermuda :P > > Now Katrina adds: > > Couldn't have been Bermuda. ...edited... What about Australia? > > Angel considers: > What about Madagascar - It's a haven for exotic plants and wildlife. > bboy_mn: Actually, Madagascar is probably an extremely likely place for Sirius to hide. I speculated Thailand/Malasia because I know they are tropical as well as magical places, but Madagascar is actually closer to Britain, and it would seem to be easy to travel accross Africa's interior undetected. You've convinced me. Steve From carolynwhite2 at aol.com Sat Nov 22 23:49:56 2003 From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 23:49:56 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess). In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85710 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > Personally, I've always been a little put off by the fact the Ron > wasn't part of the Chess Club. If there is a Gobstones club then > certainly there must be a wizard's chess club. Certainly, a good > rousing inter-house chess tournement would be fun. It might even > provide some groundwork for life after Hogwarts for Ron. Nora replied(85174): I have a great soft spot for ChessPlaying!Ron, and agree on that point. It'd be nice to see. Carolyn: Now I've just re-read PS, and found myself puzzled by Ron's supposed chess-playing skills. In my opinion, they were emphasised heavily in the first book purely to lead up to Ron's big moment in rescuing the stone and don't really add up to much. I am not a chess player myself, but to my mind, someone who is good at chess is supposed to be good at strategy, and thinking ahead of the game. Frankly, I don't see Ron behaving like this in later books; its more of a Hermione thing, although, ironically we are given the impression that she is not good at chess. I did some research into previous posts on this and found at least two from people who play chess who seriously questioned the intelligence of the moves Ron played (Katrin-43590 and Alexander- 40237). There was also a clever one proposing that Ron was NOT good at chess, it was only Harry who thought so, not being a very experienced player himself (44744). Then there was a major theory set piece from Grey Wolf (38278), who asserted that the major point in chess is knowing when to sacrifice a piece, and that this is heart & gut decision not a logic one. As Ron has this kind of ability in buckets, Grey Wolf asserted that he would eventually make this kind of decision in a battle-situation and lose his life (probably to save Harry or A N Other), and in doing this he would ultimately up-stage all the achievements of his brothers. On top of all this, there appears to be some interesting extra complexities to consider in that the pieces in a wizarding chess appear to be able to argue with the player ! Any new thoughts on the chess theme and Ron's role, now that the real battle has commenced ? From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 00:00:27 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 00:00:27 -0000 Subject: Identifying the Put-Outer In-Reply-To: <28CABF6C.031C661D.4B073798@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85711 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, SnapesSlytherin at a... wrote: > I don't think this question has been asked of OoP yet, but there's always the possibility it was. If it had, I'll iron my hands. > > > OoP, Chapter Three: page 58 (American): > > ....edited... > > "Borrowed it from Dumbledore," growled Moody, pocketing the Put-Outer. > > > My question is this: how did Harry know it was the Put-Outer? We usually learn about things like that from Harry's POV and nowhere in that area did anyone mention the Put-Outers name. Are we just supposed to assume Harry just *knew* the name? > > Oryomai bboy_mn: Brighter minds than mine will correct me if I'm wrong, but Harry is not the narrator. A third persons narrates the story from Harry's point of view. That's not quit the same thing as Harry narrating it. Stated another way, the story is narrated from Harry's point of view, but it's not narrated by Harry. The narration doesn't use references like 'I', 'me', or 'we' as it narrates, 'I went here', 'We did that'; it identifies Harry by a name, 'Harry felt this', 'Harry heard that', 'They went there', etc.... And (again deferring to brighter minds), it is narrated in past tense. The narrative doesn't say, 'Harry is going down the stairs' as if it were happening in realtime; it says, 'Harry went down the stairs'. That may not be the ideal example, but it still illustrates the point. So, Harry may not have known it was the 'Put-Outer', but the narrator did because that same third party narrator, narrated the beginning of the book where Dumbledore used it. Alternately, Harry may have some dream awareness of it. He says on the way to the Zoo that he dreamt about a flying motorcycle, which implies that he has dream of the events of the night Hagrid brought him to the Dursleys. In a sense, the first chapter might have been the 'third party' narrating Harry's dream. Just a thought. bboy_mn From kkearney at students.miami.edu Sun Nov 23 00:00:33 2003 From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 00:00:33 -0000 Subject: Identifying the Put-Outer In-Reply-To: <28CABF6C.031C661D.4B073798@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85712 Oryomai asked: > > OoP, Chapter Three: page 58 (American): > "Got it," he muttered, raising what looked like a silver cigarette lighter into the air and clicking it. > > The nearest streetlamp went out with a pop. He clicked the unlighter again; the next lamp went out. He kept clicking until every lamp in the square was extinguished and the only light in the square came from curtained windows and the sickle moon overhead. > > "Borrowed it from Dumbledore," growled Moody, pocketing the Put-Outer. > > > My question is this: how did Harry know it was the Put-Outer? We usually learn about things like that from Harry's POV and nowhere in that area did anyone mention the Put-Outers name. Are we just supposed to assume Harry just *knew* the name? I don't think it necessarily implies that he does know the name. If he did, I think it would say, "raising a Put-Outer into the air and clicking it". Instead Rowling used the description, which implies Harry had never seen or heard of this device before. The word Put-Outer is used in a fairly neutral area, so it could a description from the perspective of the omnicient narrator (who is present, despite the fact that she usually limits her decriptions to Harry's perpective) rather than Harry's. -Corinth From przepla at ipartner.com.pl Sun Nov 23 00:19:50 2003 From: przepla at ipartner.com.pl (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:19:50 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess). In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FBFFD26.4040606@ipartner.com.pl> No: HPFGUIDX 85713 a_reader2003 wrote: >Now I've just re-read PS, and found myself puzzled by Ron's supposed >chess-playing skills. In my opinion, they were emphasised heavily in >the first book purely to lead up to Ron's big moment in rescuing the >stone and don't really add up to much. I am not a chess player >myself, but to my mind, someone who is good at chess is supposed to >be good at strategy, and thinking ahead of the game. Frankly, I don't >see Ron behaving like this in later books; its more of a Hermione >thing, although, ironically we are given the impression that she is >not good at chess. > > Pshemekan's thought: I think that's because Ron does not understand human motives and emotions, as well as Hermione. Chess is purely logical game -- so Ron perhaps is good strategist when it does not need analysing fellow human emotions. When (and if) Ron will became Quidditch captain in book 6, we can be shown, how he can cope with planning matches strategy. Alternatively, if 'Ron is a Seer' theory will happen, question why Ron always wins chess with Harry can be answered by stating that he simply profess next Harry's move. -- Przemyslaw 'Pshemekan' Plaskowicki I believe that if it were left to artists to choose their own labels, most would choose none. (Ben Shahn) From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 00:30:47 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 00:30:47 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess). In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85714 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" wrote: > > Nora replied(85174): > > I have a great soft spot for ChessPlaying!Ron, and agree on that > point. It'd be nice to see. > > Carolyn: > > Now I've just re-read PS, and found myself puzzled by Ron's supposed > chess-playing skills. In my opinion, they were emphasised heavily in > the first book purely to lead up to Ron's big moment in rescuing the > stone and don't really add up to much. ...edited... > bboy_mn: Oh! Oh! I got it. Scenario: the book doesn't end with Harry and Voldemort fighting it out, but with Ron and Voldemort engaged in a Chess DEATH Match with the fate of the world hanging in the balance. Winner take all! HEY! It could happen! (Well, maybe not, but it's a fun thought.) > Carolyn: > > ... two ... people who play chess ... questioned the ... the moves > Ron played ... one proposing that Ron was NOT good at chess, it was > only Harry who thought so, .... > > ... theory ... from Grey Wolf (38278), ... the major point in chess > is knowing when to sacrifice a piece, and that this is heart & gut > decision not a logic one. As Ron has this kind of ability in > buckets, Grey Wolf asserted that he would eventually make this kind > of decision in a battle-situation and lose his life ..., and in > doing this he would ultimately up-stage all the achievements of his > brothers. > bboy_mn: I think Grey Wold has a very strong theory. It's possible that the Chess Game and other similar events are setting the stage for Ron's willingness to sacrific himself for things greater than himself. Leading to Ron's ultimate sacrific to save Harry or perhaps someone else, but I favor Harry. In the past, before new books have come out, I've warned people to look out for character who are becoming very sympathetic. That is, we, the readers, develop sympathy and an emotional attachment to them. Those people are likely to be 'cannon fodder'. Well, we must admit, that Ron has been developed as a very sympathetic character; he is someone that we are all quite fond of, and more importantly, he is someone that Harry is quite fond of. With his willingness to sacrific, and a substantial character sympathy, he could indeed end up 'cannon fodder'; allthough I dearly hope not. > Carolyn: > > On top of all this, there appears to be some interesting extra > complexities to consider in that the pieces in a wizarding chess > appear to be able to argue with the player ! > > Any new thoughts on the chess theme and Ron's role, now that the > real battle has commenced ? bboy_mn; Let's consider the concept of 'idiot savant'. Some people can be not all that smart, yet have one small area of brillicance. Maybe Ron is just a chess natural, he doesn't really think about it. It's a talent that comes to him naturally; he has an instinctive sense of what to do next. Many people like Harry and Hermione, could very easily get rattled by the chess men's arguments and comments. But Ron has a very loose, free and easy attitude; it may be very easy for him to ignore the chessmen, because to him, they are like entertainment. Their fighting, arguing, and rude comments are just part of the fun of the game. Like watching a cartoon on TV while you play chess. So, Ron could have a sense of the 'game' without having a hard cold calculated approach to play. Perhaps, it's because the game is visual; maybe seeing the chess pieces on the board in three dimensions instinctively allows him to create a mental image of the possiblilities. Instead of thinking of the moves in a calculated way, he just has an instinctive sense of what the possibilities are. The point is, someone doesn't have to be like Hermione, to be good at chess. One can be acedemically margin while being specifically brilliant. One can be pour at studies but brilliantly natural at music for example. Just a thought. bboy_mn From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 01:12:40 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:12:40 -0000 Subject: The trouble with Percy In-Reply-To: <20031120155609.46009.qmail@web20509.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85715 dmoorehpnc wrote: > This Percy gone bad thing is quite interesting. I'm not convinced that Percy has gone bad, naive and miss guided yes, but DE evil I don't think so. That doesn't appear to be his character. > > Unless I missed something, I think that Percy (as well as the other Weasley Children) is reacting against being poor. I believe Percy thinks his way out of poverty is to be ambitious, follow the rules and cultivate "successful alliances". That's why he so adored > Mr Couch (in Percy's eyes the perfect role model). The Twins see their road to riches is through their joke shop. Ron sees his through personal accomplishment/fame and achievement. > > Didn't Percy remark about his father's chosen line of work and his "alliances" as the cause of the families money woes? > > I tend to be more optimistic and see a reconciliation toward the end of books. When it all comes out Percy will see the virtue in his parent's choices, unfortunately tragedy may be what opens his eyes. I like your idea of Percy's ambition being related to the family's poverty, and I certainly see the connection you're making between him and his brothers all looking for a way out. Very observant. I've been thinking that Percy himself will be the victim foreshadowed by Molly's boggart, but your post brings up another possibility. What if it's Charlie, killed in the line of duty trying to control a bunch of dragons that Voldemort has set loose on the WW? We've been given plenty of hints about how dangerous his job is. That would be tragic for the family, but it might just bring Percy to his senses. As stubborn and deluded as he is, I can't see any other way of bringing him around. (I don't think Penelope's death would bring him back to his family, though that could happen, too. Like all the other minor characters, she's there for a reason.) Just a thought that occurred to me as I read your post. Carol From nineve_laguna at hotmail.com Sun Nov 23 01:18:13 2003 From: nineve_laguna at hotmail.com (nineve_laguna) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:18:13 -0000 Subject: Harry against terrorism In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85716 > John writes: (edited) > > Harry Potter hardly classifies as a Shakespearian tragedy. Having > said that,there may be some evidence that Harry is slated to die in > the series as he does fit Joseph Campbell's model in some respects. > > Harry appears to be born with a single purpose - to defeat > Voldemort. Many characters that have a "destiny" end up dying - > Anakin Skywalker and Neo(sorry for those who haven't seen the movie > yet) are just a couple of recent examples. > But I think there are other evidences that Harry will not die. He's a > survivor - he's the boy who lived. He has a fairly positive outlook > on life, and he enjoys life. Characters who sacrifice themselves > often have a gloomy outlook, or have nothing to live for. > > Regardless, I'll be extremely unhappy if Harry dies. Extremely. > > > John > > *********** > I agree with you, John, and I will add for all the others who are > following this thread and contributed with so many diferent opinions, > that if Harry dies, so does all hope for kids who try to be a true > Gryfindor: brave, loyal and righteous. > I think the whole point of Voldemort is that doesn't matter how > powerfull you are, if you are not united you do not win (as DD says), > and it is loyalty, courage and persistence that will defeat Voldi at > the end. > If Harry dies, Voldemort must die too. He cannot win. What kind of > example for modern kids, with all terrorism and war and crime going > around this days, would JKR set if Voldi is to win at the end? With > all sufering and anxiety LV has caused to Harry and many others, it > would not be fair if he triunphs at the end. It would just make > millions of kids give up, turn to the Dark Side themselves, after > all, if you fight so much for nothing, what is the point? > What would be the point of the entire books, if Voldi was to win? > The moral of the story for me? If Harry dies, it must be an ultimate > sacrifice to save his beloved ones, something that will make me hold > the book 7 tight to my chest and cry for at least 4 hours, but still > admiring Harry for his righteous heart that stood always unblinkingly > on the right side where so many would have bowed to Lord Voldemort. > Nineve From o_caipora at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 01:24:36 2003 From: o_caipora at yahoo.com (o_caipora) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:24:36 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess). In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85717 > Carolyn: > > Now I've just re-read PS, and found myself puzzled by Ron's > supposed chess-playing skills. > I am not a chess player > myself, but to my mind, someone who is good at chess is supposed to > be good at strategy, and thinking ahead of the game. [lots of trenchant analysis snipped.] > Any new thoughts on the chess theme and Ron's role, now that > the real battle has commenced ? Ron can't be a better chess player or logician that Rowling is. Maybe he can be now, but while Rowling was writing the first book she may not have had the easy access to chess masters she presumably does now. Something's bothered me since the first book, and I hope someone has an answer. One of the puzzles was pure logic, the potions. Reading that, it took paper, pencil and fifteen minutes to see that the clues were consistent, and a bit longer to see that they were incomplete. The text didn't have enough clues. There had to be a diagram showing the heights of the bottles (or the shapes, I don't have the book here). This is probably a point settled long ago, but what gives? Did the British edition have a diagram cut in the American? Did she intentionally give a puzzle without giving the reader enough clues? Was it a mistake? Sorry to beat a dead horse, but I couldn't find it in the massive archives. Cheers, Caipora From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 01:29:27 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:29:27 -0000 Subject: Ron's dead brother In-Reply-To: <1069340562.4329.53.camel@Bujold_RH> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85718 > Liz: > > My theory is that they really, really wanted at least one girl and > > just kept going until they got one! > > > > Angel: > My theory is that there was a girl between Charlie and Percy, and she > died. (see my fic 'Ludlow Fair' for the example: > http://www.thedarkarts.org/authorLinks/Angel_Of_The_North/ ) > > We don't know how the witches work. It might be typical to have a child > or two, then work for ten years, and then have more children. A life > expectancy of 200 would suggest that child-bearing may well go on a lot > later, and therefore this is an option. > > Or maybe they had so many children so that the population would pull out > of decline :) I agree with Liz that the Weasleys really wanted a daughter and kept trying until they had one. (I wrote more on this topic in another post but am too lazy to look it up at the moment.) Regarding a missing female Weasley, Rowling intended to bring a female cousin into the GoF plot but had to eliminate her a third of the way through the book. Maybe that's how all this discussion of a dead Weasley child got started? (I realize there are other factors: the boggart, the age gap, Mr. W's remark about the DE mark hanging over a house where a murder was committed, but I'm not sure that evidence is solid enough for all the speculation.) Anyway, here's the URL for whatever it's worth: http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/0800-ew-jensen.html Carol From drednort at alphalink.com.au Sun Nov 23 01:39:29 2003 From: drednort at alphalink.com.au (Shaun Hately) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 12:39:29 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess). In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FC0AA81.26078.32F796@localhost> No: HPFGUIDX 85719 On 23 Nov 2003 at 1:24, o_caipora wrote: > Something's bothered me since the first book, and I hope someone has > an answer. > > One of the puzzles was pure logic, the potions. Reading that, it took > paper, pencil and fifteen minutes to see that the clues were > consistent, and a bit longer to see that they were incomplete. The > text didn't have enough clues. There had to be a diagram showing the > heights of the bottles (or the shapes, I don't have the book here). The size - you can pretty easily narrow it down to one of two bottles using the clues given, but without knowing the size (specifically you need to know which one is the 'dwarf', you can't pick between those two. > This is probably a point settled long ago, but what gives? Did the > British edition have a diagram cut in the American? Did she > intentionally give a puzzle without giving the reader enough clues? > Was it a mistake? AFAIK, there was never any diagram - I'd have liked one myself. Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html (ISTJ) | drednort at alphalink.com.au | ICQ: 6898200 "You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 01:51:59 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:51:59 -0000 Subject: I love tragic endings In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85720 "Helen R. Granberry" wrote: > > > In OotP, Dumbledore talks about this pain that is worse than death. > > I don't think that pain is losing what you love; I think what is > > worse than death is never knowing love at all -- or perhaps getting > > a glimpse, and knowing it is too late for you, knowing it is > > something you can never have because you made the wrong choices. > > Voldemort has chosen mere existence over truly living. He has > > forsaken all values in pursuit of this non-value ? living a life > > that is really not a life at all. Voldemort can never know > > happiness because he holds no values other than merely continuing > > to exist. He can never know love. This is worse than death ? it is > > a living death. > > Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: While I agree with you > that he has chosen a mere existence over truly living, I do have to > ask, are we SURE he has never known love or can never know love? > Maybe I'm reading too much into things, but I get the feeling > Bellatrix loves Voldy. Could it be a reciprocal thing--if not now, > then possibly in the future if Voldy were to win? > Bellatrix, though she's some twenty-five years younger than Voldemort, may be in love with him, or at least fascinated by him, in some weird way, but she can never have seen him in his (handsome) human form. He left at about age eighteen (before she was born) to seek out dark wizards, and when he came back had transformed himself so frequently that he was barely recognizable. (Presumably any resemblance to Tom Riddle is now completely gone.) Her husband and brother-in-law also joined Voldemort, so whatever the attraction was (revenge for the pure bloods?), they shared it with her. Presumably it wasn't physical attraction in their case, at least. As for Voldemort himself being in love with anyone but himself, young Tom murdered his father and grandparents at seventeen and coolly went back to school as Head Boy (one more reason I hope that position is automatically granted based on marks and not awarded based on perceived merit). At the end of his seventh year he went off to explore the dark arts, returned many years later to collect followers (including the Lestranges), was vaporized, prowled the forests of Albania looking for animals to possess as temporary hosts for his body, took over Quirrell, etc. No time in that busy and admirable career to look for love. To return to Bellatrix, she seems to regard Voldemort as some sort of mentor or teacher who taught her much of what she knows of the Dark Arts. I could cite some passages from OoP to back this up if anyone wants them. Maybe Voldemort is her Dumbledore, and her fierce loyalty to LV parallels Harry's to DD? Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 01:56:16 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:56:16 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85721 Janet Anderson wrote: > Even Andromeda Black Tonks, whom we never see, has two pieces of evidence > that she was pretty interesting -- one, that she left her family to marry a > Muggle, and two, Tonks herself, who presumably resembles both her parents. Actually Ted Tonks was a muggle-born wizard, not a muggle. That's somewhere in the Grimmauld Place section of OoP; I can't provide a page number on it at the moment. Which is not to disagree that she' more interesting than what we've seen so far of Daffodil. I mean Narcissa. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 02:20:04 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 02:20:04 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85722 - > > Lily's school friends (along with Alice Longbottom) who can't come > > forward to help Harry because of who her family is. But it's all > > delightful speculation which I can't possibly back up. :-) > > > Tom: > > I think the point I was trying to make that Narcissa is in a much > better position to be the spy for the Order and not Snape. We do know > Snape is getting information, but from who and how? Narcissa is the > who I believe and I just wanted to establish motive. > Tom, as I mentioned in another post, Narcissa is not trustworthy. She's the one Kreacher went to when Sirius (unthinkingly) ordered him to get out and she passed on Kreacher's information to Lucius, who passed it to Voldemort. So she's connected to the plan to lure Harry to the MoM thinking that Sirius is in danger. Not a person likely to give information to Snape. If he blows his cover to her (which I don't think for a moment he would do), he's in big trouble. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 03:10:33 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:10:33 -0000 Subject: I *love* tragic endings ! (Was : Re: What if Harry dies?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85723 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: > What about the possibility that sometime before the final battle [we > all seem to be assuming it will be some big monstrous final battle, > anyway], MANY MORE wizards & witches will join the ranks of those > willing to fight--The Order, Dumbledore's Army, perhaps a new > organization or army? What if, even if it IS Harry who has to be the > one to kill Voldemort, hundreds of others are right there beside him, > pushing back & eliminating Voldy's Death Eaters? Then, even though > Harry would take that final action to ensure total victory, there > would truly be hundreds [or thousands?] of others right there to > [rightfully!] share in the glory. THAT would remove some of those > pressures you went on to talk about. > Excellent point! Harry isn't Frodo on a lone quest to throw the One Ring into Mt. Doom, with only Ron (as Sam) to keep him on his feet and sustain his will. Harry's friends and a lot of other people are going to be involved in this war (including a very probable siege of Hogwarts). We've already seen Harry joined by others who are eager to help him triumph over Voldemort (or in Hermione's case, talk him into seeing the battle in realistic terms and stand by him if he doesn't), and I think he may have lost some of his lone hero delusions as a result of the debacle at the DoM. Yes, the DEs were arrested and one has his head caught in a time warp, but Harry was tricked and Sirius is dead. Even with the Prophecy, we shouldn't see him having more thoughts like the ones he hadwhen Ron and Hermione got Prefect badges and he didn't: "They didn't fight Quirrell with me. They didn't take on Riddle and the basilisk. They didn't get rid of all those dementors the night Sirius escaped. They weren't in that graveyard with me, the night Voldemort returned. . . ." (OoP 167, Am. ed.) I devoutly hope he's put all such thoughts behind him. Not only Ron and Hermione but Luna and Neville and Ginny were with him in the DoM and some of them were injured in the battle. Not only that but he, Harry, did not triumph over anyone. He had to be saved by Dumbledore and the person he intended to rescue was killed trying to rescue him. So Harry must know now, despite the prophecy, that he can't do this alone. He and Voldemort must ultimately fight it out, but there are other battles and plenty of other dangers from Death Eaters to dragons for them to face. I'll be very surprised if each of the kids with Harry at the DoM doesn't do at least one heroic thing before the end. And I "Siriusly" hope that Snape does, too, not to mention the other members of the Order and the myriad of minor characters we've become so fond of, from Mrs. Figg to Dobby. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 03:34:16 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:34:16 -0000 Subject: Ron's Dead Brother in Casablanca In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85724 Phil(istine) wrote: > I started the thread "Ron's Dead Brother" > ( post #85269, reproduced below) > hoping for comments on whether members' theories agreed that Harry > thinking Ron was beyond 'The VEIL' is significant. So far, > most responses have discussed the 'missing Weasley' part only, > yet I thought this an already well established theory, though not > fact. > I apologise for not being able to give credit to who first mentioned > the 'missing Weasley'. > > Harry calling out "Is that you, Ron?" at the veil suggests > 3 possibilities to me:- > > 1. A living person beyond the veil sounds like Ron. > 2. A dead person beyond the veil sounds like Ron. > 3. JKR is foreshadowing Ron's death :-( > > I am not as well read as many of you theorists on this excellent site, > and my simple reading of 'the veil' does not come over as 'boundary > with the dead', but I seem to be a minority of one, lol. If the > voices are from the dead, could the 'missing Weasley' be there? > Would the dead brother have been about Ron's age, to sound like him? Forgive me for sounding like Hermione, but the parts of your post that I snipped are way too esoteric for me. I don't think there's any need to connect the veil with Ron. The voices he and Luna hear (which I do think are the voices of the dead, just as only they and our "stringy" Slytherin boy [Theodore Nott?] can hear) are *whispers.* They don't resemble Ron's voice or anyone's. You can't tell a man's whisper from a little girl's. All whispers sound the same, with the distinctive intonations of the individual voice. He simply asks, "Is that you, Ron?" because Ron, his best friend, is the first person he thinks of and he can't see him at the moment. (Ron is behind the archway.) I do think the arch is important, in part because it makes Sirius's death so mysterious and there's no body and no funeral to help Harry accept the death as real (or "provide closure," as the sociologists say). I'm sure that it's a portal to the world of the dead (which explains why it's in the department of mysteries along with life, time, the future and (probably) love (behind the locked door) and that it will play an important part in Book 7, but I don't think it has anything to do with Ron. I firmly predict that Ron will survive the series and follow in the family tradition of having lots of red-headed children. I was going to say that if he doesn't, I'll personally *walk* to England from Tucson (try that, anybody!) and marry ESE!Bill Weasley, but then people wouldn't take my previous post seriously. So I didn't say that. I really do think Ron will survive, though, and that the whispered voices didn't resemble his or anyone else's. Carol From whizbang121 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 00:51:38 2003 From: whizbang121 at yahoo.com (whizbang) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 00:51:38 -0000 Subject: Mrs Longbottom's Hat Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85725 A few days ago on another forum, a few of us were talking about the trailer, particularly the scene where the Boggart as Snape is suddenly wearing Granny Longbottom's clothes. I jokingly suggested that perhaps Snape's animagus was a vulture. Immediately, someone responded: a death eater! We cyberchuckled and moved on. Since then I've had some discussions with offline friends, and we have begun to wonder if this was meant for us to pay more attention to Mrs Longbottom's hat. Is this a clue that she is a spy for Voldemort? Could she be responsible for the sleepy states of her son and daughter in law as well as Neville's seeming to sometimes be in a fog? But Neville's come a long way since Uncle Algie gave him that plant. How does Uncle Algie fit into all this? WhizBang From whizbang121 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 01:06:10 2003 From: whizbang121 at yahoo.com (whizbang) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:06:10 -0000 Subject: Is Snape a pureblood?, was: Of course Snape is a Slytherin, was: Re: Snape In-Reply-To: <10.38a3de8a.2cf0ae9c@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85726 > Eloise: > Actually, this was Hagrid in Diagon Alley answering Harry's questions, just after his first encounter with Draco. > > This being the case, it has been used as evidence that *Sirius* >was a Slytherin as at that point, Hagrid believes that it was >Sirius who betrayed the Potters and murdered Peter and the Muggles. >Some would argue that this is just Hagrid speaking very loosely. >OTOH, given what we now know of Sirius' family, then his being >sorted into Slytherin isn't ludicrous. When Sirius was asked if he was ever prefect he responded that Lupin was the good boy as he and James were often in detention together. If they had been in different houses, this wouldn't have mattered. We know James played quidditch for the Gryffindors so it seems a safe guess that Sirius and Remus probably were as well. WhizBang From LWalshETAL at aol.com Sun Nov 23 04:40:58 2003 From: LWalshETAL at aol.com (LWalshETAL at aol.com) Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 23:40:58 EST Subject: Accents in Audio Versions of Books Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85727 In a message dated 11/22/03 6:02:13 PM, HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com writes: > > Laura: > > > > In the German version of GoF, Rufus Beck gives Rita Skeeter > > (Rita Kimmkorn) a very broad American accent, with insertions > > of "Ya know," and an occasional American English word. It has > > been interesting to me to speculate as to why. ...edited.. > > > > Laura Walsh > > > bboy_mn: > > I wonder if it isn't just a case of running out of unique voices. With > so many and such diversified characters, it must be very difficult for > one reader to come up with distinctive voices for each character. > > Remember, it's a lot easier to imagine a voice in your head than it is > to vocalize it. I have a mental image of the voices of all character, > but couldn't speak in any of those voices to save my life. > > bboy_mn > This strikes me as a bit odd. In England, there are distinct accents when you travel just a few dozen miles in any direction. There have been numerous posts about just how different each accent is. Germany has this same distinction, if I recall correctly. There are plenty of different accents to go around, especially since Rita is a woman and there aren't exactly THAT many major women characters in GoF. And why American? Is there anything in the books in English (or American, for that matter) to indicate that Rita might be an American? It gives the book a divisive overtone that is very jarring to me, since I am an American. If it had been another German accent, say a Viennese accent or a Swiss German accent, it would have been more in keeping with the regional focus of the British/Scottish/Irish/etc. set of accents. No, I couldn't do all of those characters either, but these are actors, and very expert ones. I would expect them to be able to do a wide variety of voices. On another note, one of the better changes in translation that I have found is that Voyages with Vampires is translated as Abstecher mit Vampiren. Abstecher is a wonderful pun, meaning side trips, but also hailing from the root word, stechen, which means to puncture, like a mosquito or, ta da, a vampire's fangs. Laura Walsh LWalshETAL at aol.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From greatelderone at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 04:47:02 2003 From: greatelderone at yahoo.com (greatelderone) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 04:47:02 -0000 Subject: Neville's Gran In-Reply-To: <000601c3afe7$78b80d60$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85728 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" wrote: > Which brings us to Neille. There was no purpose served by his wand being broken. The importance of it happening, therefore, must come in the replacing of that wand. There must be either an improvement with the new wand, or we find out something about the old wand or if Gran will "kill him" for breaking it. It just seems very significant to me. GEO: Yes there was. The breaking of the wand symbolized Neville growing out of his father's shadow and becoming his own man or wizard. It's very similar to Luke losing his father's lightsaber in the duel against Vader in Empire Strikes Back or King Arthur shattering his father's blade in battle so that the Lady of the Lake could give him excalibur. From erinellii at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 04:58:44 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 04:58:44 -0000 Subject: TBAY: The Bill Weasley is Ever So Evil post (2 of 3) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85729 Erin was back on her barstool at the Royal George Tavern. She had an appointment to keep. Someone named Oliver had contacted her, saying he was interested in hearing more of her Evil!Bill theory. This encouraged Erin, who had almost given up hope of getting the message out after George had run screaming from the woods last night. Really, Erin thought, he *had* behaved rather childishly. All she'd done was tell him he'd have to listen to a wee bit more characterization before she got down to the really juicy canon points. Well, and then Hercule Poirot had popped in. And then Kneasy.... perhaps she shouldn't blame George for leaving before his head exploded. A Snapetheory based on a dignified, logical Severus Snape couldn't be expected to react well to the sight of snot-nosed Snape! Son. Erin frowned. Was Snape!Son Snape himself as a child, or an actual son of Snape? She'd have to remember to ask Kneasy next time. She sneaked a glance at George behind the bar. Last night, he'd pulled himself together long enough to speak to Eileen before returning to the tavern. And he seemed to be all right this morning. Erin had spoken to him when she ordered the drinks for herself and the mysterious Oliver, and he'd even agreed to post a banner listing the names of all BB GUN (Bitter Bill Goes Undeniably Nefarious) adherents. So far, Erin and Eileen were the only names up there. "It's not for you," he'd said curtly when she'd tried to thank him. "It's for all the rest of us in Theory Bay who have a right to know which of you nutters are running around armed!" "Really, George," Erin had protested. "BB GUNs only sting a little. It's not as if they're lethal weapons or anything." She made a mental note to offer Eileen an actual BB GUN as soon as possible. "You say that now," George countered, turning his handsome face towards her forbiddingly, "but just wait until one of them hits you in the *eye*." He stalked off. Suddenly, Erin's reminiscing was interrupted by the sound of a horrible mock baby voice somewhere behind her. She shuddered, and turned to just in time to hear a young newbie being bullied by an older man declare, "I have an appointment here!" That must be Oliver! Well, no one bullied potential BB GUN converts when Erin was around. "Leave him alone, you old fart!" she yelled loudly, causing George to drop and duck for cover under the bar. "You're not Bellatrix, and only she has a right to use a mock baby voice here! Though I sincerely hope no one ever sees fit to bring her in," she adds in an undertone. "Bellatrix is scary". Oliver runs over to Erin, and they go through the introductions. Erin ties to press a BB GUN into Oliver's hands, -- "It'll give you more confidence, really it will!"-- but Oliver refuses, saying he wants to hear more canon first. "But Erin," he whispers uneasily, "something is embarrassing me. You have red hair, you love guns and canon, you wear a trenchcoat, and you even admitted you have a lot of friends like Bill. Are you an evil Weasley too, Erin?" Erin laughs and claps Oliver heartily on the back, "No, no, Oliver- you see, my trenchcoat is BROWN- and that makes *all* the difference in the world." Seeing that Oliver doesn't look entirely comforted by this cryptic disclaimer, she casts around for something to make him more at ease. Seizing on Oliver's PARTY LINE (Principled Altruistic Righteous Teacher: Yummy Lupin Is Not Evil) badge, she exclaims, "Hey, I have one of those, too! I didn't actually argue for it or anything, but there's a box of them up there on the counter and I figured, why not? JKR loves Lupin, so why shouldn't I? So see, Oliver, we're not so different, you and I." "But I see your point. Thus far, I've pretty much just stereotyped Bill based on his clothes." "Yes," agrees Oliver in his charming French accent. "Let us look at BB GUN. So Bill swears and annoys his mother, even though he should have grown up by now. He wears dragon-leather boots (a bit flashy if you ask me) and a fang earring. He is so cool and so attractive (even Fleur falls for him, and I can tell you, it is not every day a french girl falls for a red-haired British). So here you have a rebellious youth, with a dubious sense of morality, maybe permanently traumatized by the loss of a younger sibling..." "And the possible shock of finding out his father was enslaved by the Imperius curse, don't forget that one!" Erin interrupts. "But, Erin, I think you left something out. I would add that he has some kind of curse addiction. I mean, who wants to work as a curse- breaker in Egypt? Molly wouldn't even let Ginny enter in all the Pyramids. So here is a man working daily in a place plagued by curses worse than being possessed by Voldemort. And he's even enjoying it. Robbing ancient wizards of their treasure is obviously his idea of fun." "That's very astute of you, Oliver" says Erin. "in fact, if George hadn't run out on me," --and here she paused to shoot a nasty look at the bar where George was busily polishing beer tankards in preparation for the evening rush-- "that would have been my very next point. But since you're not George, I'm gonna throw you a little canon first. "You may remember that when I left off post #85610 in the woods, I was saying Bill joined up with the Death Eaters out of fear. The old "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em" syndrome. I think he made this decision pretty early on in his life, most likely while he was still at Hogwarts. And here is my reasoning for that: *********************** >"You know, it rings a sort of bell,"said Ron slowly. "I think >someone told me a story about a secret chamber at Hogwarts once... >might've been Bill...." ************************CoS, Ch. 9 "Oh yes, it was Bill all right. But how did Bill know? Sure, there was all that unpleasantness with the Chamber of Secrets 50 years ago- would've been closer to 40 years ago when Bill was in school, I suppose- but then we find out that the Chamber has been "hushed up" by old Professor Dippet, the former Hogwarts headmaster. Hushed up so well that no one knows what Myrtle died of, and students in Harry's time have to check out 'Hogwarts, A History' in droves to look up the legend so they can find out what it's all about. "The only people who do seem to know what's going on are the Slytherins. Which only makes sense. After all, the Chamber is a legend from their house, one which they probably hand down to each new class of students. So in order to have heard about the Chamber of Secrets when he was at school, Bill had to have been associating pretty closely with some Slytherins- closely enough that they would tell him their house secrets-- sounds almost as if they thought he was a true Slytherin at heart, doesn't it?" An alarmed look appears on Olivier's face. "Wait, I must check something." Plunging his hand into his cloak, he withdraws a battered parchment and quickly thumbs through it. "I knew it. Ever wondered who was Head of the Slytherin House before Snape ? Isn't it a bit fishy that he disappeared just when Voldemort met his downfall ? My bet is he was not at all opposed to the victory of the Heir of Slytherin. And notice he was still there when Bill started. Of course the young Slytherins would have known about the Chamber: their own Head of House would have been only too happy to tell them. Now what subject could he have been teaching ?" says Olivier "Well, only Potions and Defense against the Dark Arts were available when it came time to set Snape up with a job" answers Erin. "Exactly!" says Oliver. "Now Bill was an exceptionally brilliant student: he had 12 OWLs ! That suggests he aced Potions and Defense against the Dark Arts. And if the past Slytherin head was anything like the current one, I'm thinking Bill had to get along with him pretty well in order to wrangle that grade. "He could even," Oliver continued slowly, thinking hard, "have *suggested* Bill's career as one that would be useful to Voldemort." "Oh Oliver, that's *brilliant*!" crowed Erin. "I, also, was going to say that Bill had chosen a career he thought would get him in good with the Death Eaters. I love the idea of the Head of Slytherin House telling him Voldemort had an urgent need for curse breakers!" "It only makes sense, really. If you're a Death Eater who's just been cursed in a shoot-out with the Aurors, you can't exactly toddle up to St. Mungo's and ask them to change your new chicken feet back into hands, can you? You'd be arrested and thrown in Azkaban before you could blink. Enter curse-breaker Bill. Maybe he's not quite as handy as a fully trained Healer, (which I don't think any death eater would have the temperament for, they're more into the hurting) but he can reverse all the regular curses, at least. It's just his little way of trying to make himself indispensable to Voldemort. "And what about his present-day work environment, huh? Those goblins don't give a damn what Bill wears, as long as he brings home the treasure. Do they care what he has to do to get it? I like that idea of yours about robbing the ancient wizards of their treasure, Oliver. You know, there are laws in the muggle world about antiquities. Basically, if Bill was a muggle, what he's doing for Gringotts would be illegal. The ancient artifacts he recovers would belong to Egypt, not a private bank. "Even if you want to argue that he's only recovering treasure that belonged to witches and wizards, stuff that muggles never owned and should have no share in now, what about the Egyptian wizards? I can't believe that in a society where Ollivander's family has owned the *same* wand shop since 382 B.C., there aren't some known descendants of those ancient Egyptian wizards still hanging around. Shouldn't that treasure go to them? "There's just something wrong about Bill's job. Why else is Molly Weasley so determined to push the twins into boring Ministry of Magic careers that they've made it clear they have no interest in? I mean, it would seem from an outside perspective that they have two older brothers who are happy with having rewarding careers outside the MoM. But apparently Molly doesn't want them emulating Bill or Charlie. I suppose I can see why she might disapprove of Charlie's job. Handling wild dragons is extremely dangerous. Charlie sports all sorts of burns and calluses when Harry meets him. But what does Molly know about Bill's job that we don't?" "Not just his job," says Oliver quickly. "I have always wondered why Molly always takes Percy as an example for the twins when she could impress them much more by taking Bill. After all, he was a Head Boy too, and the Twins most certainly respect him a lot more than Percy, considering he is much older and already working. There's definitely something that makes her uncomfortable about her son, and it's not just the fang earring" "That fang earring is starting to make ME uncomfortable," Erin mutters. She leans in closer to whisper to Oliver, "I think it's a *snake* fang, don't you?" "Possibly," she adds, straightening up and speaking more briskly, "another thing that irks Molly is Bill's choice of companions. I get the feeling from OoP that he hangs around with those goblins *after* work, too." "The Goblins themselves strike me as dubious characters. I'm not going to get into everything we know about the goblins- I actually have an idea for another post that deals with that- but I do want to mention that there is a lot of doubt about what side they are going to support in the coming war. And if they stay neutral, just think how nice that will be for Bill. He won't even have to *pretend* to hate Voldemort while he's at work." "Oliver, surely by now you're starting to see things my way?" Erin waves a BB GUN temptingly in front of him, but Oliver doesn't reach out to take it. "Oh, all right," sighs Erin, "you want more canon, I suppose. Well, this next bit is really the clincher for me. It's my very favorite piece of canon for BB GUN- the one that leaves absolutely no doubt in my mind that Bill is Ever So Evil. The Sneakoscope scene in Ron's birthday letter to Harry. "For you to truly understand its relevance, I have to first refer to the PoA Sneakoscope scene on the Hogwarts express. I'm sure everyone remembers that one. "Harry, Ron and Hermione sit down inside a compartment with the sleeping Professor Lupin. Ron notices that a whistling noise is coming from Harry's trunk. It's the Sneakoscope. Ron explains to Hermione that he thinks the Sneakoscope is broken because it went off while he was tying it to Errol's foot to ship to Harry, but then has to admit that he *was* doing something untrustworthy at the time- he wasn't supposed to be using Errol. "The first time anyone reads this scene in PoA, they immediately think, uh-oh, the new Defense against the Dark Arts teacher is untrustworthy! He's just pretending to sleep! "It isn't until a second reading (or third, or fourth for some) that one realizes the Sneakoscope is actually reacting, not to Lupin, but to Ron's rat, Scabbers." "Pippin's *never* realized it." Oliver says darkly, fingering his PARTY LINE badge. "No, I suspect she'd say that Scabbers was a false clue leading us away from Lupin," Erin says, "but I think if we asked around we'd find more people see it our way. Now, let's look at Ron's letter: ********************** >Harry-- this is a Pocket Sneakoscope. If there's someone >untrustworthy around, it's supposed to light up and spin. Bill says >it's rubbish sold for wizard tourists and isn't reliable, because it >kept lighting up at dinner last night. But he didn't realize Fred >and George had put beetles in his soup. **********************POA, Ch. 1 To compare that point by point to the train scene: 1.) The Sneakoscope lights up. 2.) Someone- Ron in the train and Bill in the letter- states that it is unreliable. 3.) That statement is then retracted- Ron wasn't supposed to use Errol and the twins had put beetles in Bill's soup. 4.) We are left with the probable cause of the Sneakoscope's reaction- Untrustworthy Lupin and untrustworthy twins. "But, I think that a case can be made for point number five- the false clue: 5.) The TRUE culprit is someone different from the one readers are led to believe in-- untrustworthy Scabbers and untrustworthy Bill. "OK, think about it" says Erin. "Why would the Sneakoscope 'keep' lighting up at dinner? Wouldn't it just light up the one time, *while* Fred and George are putting the beetles in Bill's soup? No, I think something else is going on. ESE!Bill is having to make table talk with his parents. He's having to discuss politics and world views. And in order to hide his true opinions on certain subjects, he's having to lie. And every time he lies, the Sneakoscope goes off. Bill realizes what is going on, and quickly tells his family that the Sneakoscope is "rubbish sold for wizard tourists" in order to prevent anyone else from realizing it. "What else? Well, there's the scene after Voldemort's return at the end of GoF: ***************************** > "Then I need to send a message to Arthur," said Dumbledore. "All >those that we can persuade of the truth must be notified >immediately, and he is well placed to contact those at the Ministry >who are not as shortsighted as Cornelius." > "I'll go to Dad', said Bill, standing up. "I'll go now." ************************************GoF, Ch. 36 "I think it more than a little suspicious that Bill is so eager to leave. Dumbledore was saying that a "message" would be sufficient, presumably sent by owl post, yet Bill seemed to feel Arthur *had* to be informed in person?" "Wait a minute!" cries George, who has obviously been listening in from over at the bar. "I thought you were a crew member on the Imperius!Arthur trimaran?! Surely you remember that Elkins has already explained this for you? You Imperius!Arthur people believe that Bill was eager to spare Arthur- a victim of the Imperius curse during Voldemort's previous reign- the shock of learning Voldemort had returned through an impersonal letter. You believe that Bill wanted to break the news to him more gently, and to be right by his side, like a good son should, while he coped with it." Erin starts guiltily. "Well, yes," she said, "yes, I do believe that... and yet-- Oh George," she bursts out, "There just has to be more to it than that! Look, look at the next thing Bill does: *************************** >"Excellent,' said Dumbledore. 'Tell him what has happened. Tell him >I will be in direct contact with him shortly. He will need to be >discreet, however. If Fudge thinks I am interfering at the Ministry- " > "Leave it to me," said Bill. ****************************GoF, Ch. 36 "Now look at that. Bill cuts off Dumbledore! Who, in their right mind, cuts off Dumbledore? Dumbledore, the greatest wizard of the century, the only one Voldemort fears, should NOT be cut off when giving advice on how to combat the Dark Lord-- at least not by a young wizard on Dumbledore's own side. My guess is that Evil!Bill didn't want his instructions to get too specific so that he could claim a misunderstanding in the event his treachery is later discovered. Specifically, he didn't want Dumbledore to instruct him NOT to speak to anyone other than Mr. Weasley. "Because, as I see it, *this* is Bill's big moment. This is the thing he's been waiting for nearly half his life- Voldemort's return. Maybe he's been waiting with fear, maybe with anticipation, but he, like all the rest of the wizarding world, has always known that this day would come. And Bill has always known what he would have to do. He goes and informs Mr. Weasley just the way he's supposed to, of course. He knows that it can be easily verified if he doesn't. But what does he do *after* that? "Elkins called Bill's decision to be the one inform Arthur a "preemptive strike" in the Imperius!Arthur theory. That's a rather strong phrase for someone who just wants to comfort his father, don't you think? But when you apply it to Evil!Bill, it becomes very literally true. Where *did* Bill go after he informed Arthur? He went straight to one of those Death Eaters that Harry Potter had just so obligingly named a few minutes ago, and said "I want to sign up." "And where might he have gone after that? Who knows what damage he could have wreaked? Perhaps this is the solution to the mystery of Percy's behavior all through OoP. Just picture it: Bill runs straight to Percy and says "Harry's gone mad and killed Cedric Diggory. And Dumbledore and Mum have fallen for every word of his crazy story. They actually believe Lord Voldemort has returned, and Dad and Mum are going to join this nutty Order thing of Dumbledore's. " "So Percy is like, "Oh no! Are you going to tell them what you think about this?" And that's where Bill says, "No, I don't want to fight with them. If you have to bring it up, leave me out of it, okay?" And so, when Percy is fighting with Mr. and Mrs. Weasley, he doesn't say anything about Bill because he's been asked not to. But the whole time, he believes Bill secretly agrees with him that LV has not come back, and that their parents are acting irresponsibly. "After Percy moves out, Evil!Bill may even be corresponding with him, feeding him stories about what other crazy high jinks the senior Weasleys have been up to, and leading him to think that nearly all the Weasley children agree with Percy's stand but are too scared to say anything. That may be why Percy writes to Ron, because he thinks there's a chance Ron actually sees things his way. It also explains why Percy is so very happy when he thinks Fudge is about to arrest Dumbledore: he truly thinks Dumbledore is crazy and that after he is arrested, Mr. and Mrs. Weasley will see the truth and they can be a family again. "What other Evil!Bill evidence is there? All of his behavior after the Quidditch World Cup seems suspicious to me. Again, this is definitely not consistent with Elkins' Imperius!Arthur interpretations of those scenes, but I've always thought those were the weakest in the LAW CAMERA theory anyway. I confess I tried and tried to read into Bill's actions after the Cup the motivations she subscribes to them, and I just find myself not able to read it that way. "So...There's Bill's enthusiasm when he thinks he's actually seen Death Eaters in action. "I think we saw what's left of them tonight-- the ones who managed to keep themselves out of Azkaban..." Mr Weasley has to step in and remind him that they can't be sure those really *were* the DE's that they saw. But I can practically hear Bill salivating every time I read those lines. "And then, in post #85611, Allie recently said: "At the end of GoF Molly says that it's "Arthur's love of Muggles that has kept him back at the ministry all these years." When I read that, I said, "ohhhhh." Makes sense, doesn't it? he probably could have moved up in the ministry, but he loves his dear Muggles too much. He basically *IS* the Misuse of Muggle Artifacts office, isn't he? What would happen if he left? "It's amazing none of his children resent the Muggles for it..." "Or do they, Allie?" Erin asks with a sinister smile, "Or do they?" "Now hang on a minute!" Oliver protests. "I know, I am *positive*, that there is NO instance of Bill mistreating or resenting muggles in the story!" "Not overtly, no," says Erin. "In fact, Bill goes to great lengths to hide his resentment of muggles. Let's take a look at how he refers to the caretaker's family at the Quidditch World Cup: *************************** >We caught the Robertses before they hit the ground, though. They're >having their memories modified right now. ***************************GoF, Ch. 9 "Sounds so sweet and caring, doesn't he? "The Robertses". He's taken the time to learn their family name. Almost as if he cares about them personally. "In fact, it's a little TOO sweet and caring for me. I can't think of a time when I've heard another pureblood wizard refer to a family of muggles by their *name*. Ron, who constantly hears Harry talk about the Dursleys, always calls them "those muggles you live with". Even Mr. Weasley, who loves muggles, never calls them by their names. It's always just "muggles". I think it would have sounded much more natural for Bill to have said "We caught the muggles before they hit the ground." He's trying too hard... And lastly, there's the way his attitude towards the free Death Eaters echoes that of Barty Crouch Jr. When he's telling Ron about them at the QWC, he says: ****************************** >"If they really were Death Eaters, they worked very hard to keep out >of Azkaban when You-Know-Who lost power, and told all sorts of lies >about him forcing them to kill and torture people. I bet they'd be >even more frightened than the rest of us to see him come back. They >denied they'd ever been involved with him when he lost his powers, >and went back to their daily lives... I don't reckon he'd be over- >pleased with them, do you?" ******************************GoF, Ch. 9 "This is pretty much exactly what Crouch Jr. told Harry after Voldemort's return, isn't it? And it's also something Bill has thought out pretty fully. Gee, I wonder why Bill would spend all that time thinking about how LV relates to his Death Eaters?" Erin sniggers sarcastically. "And when you add in Crouch Jr's hatred of the escaped DE's, and Bill's attitude towards Snape... ********************************* >"Bill doesn't like him either," said Ginny, as though that settled >the matter." *********************************OoP, Ch. 4 "Oh it *does* settle the matter, Ginny. Yes indeed." Erin turns to Oliver, offering a BB GUN in her outstretched hands. "Take it! Take it!" she urges. "You believe now, I *know* you do!" Oliver takes a long, hard look at the BB GUN. "It is not a such a clear-cut question in my opinion," he says regretfully. "In fact, it raises the problem of-- what does believing in a theory about Harry Potter mean? I would say that I can believe in a theory in two ways. I can believe in a theory in the sense that I think it is likely that this theory will be proved in future books. Or I can believe in a theory in the sense that I would not consider it illogical that this theory is proved in the future books." "I must confess I do not believe in ESE!Bill in the first sense, but that, contrary to what I thought when I first heard about your theory, I was convinced by your reasoning in the second sense." Erin thinks about that one for a second. Finally, she says "You know, that's OK with me. I think that is enough, really, for Theory Bay. And that goes for anyone who wants to sign up for this theory!" she shouts so that the whole room can hear her. "Here, take the gun!" She tries to press it once more into his hands. Oliver holds off a little longer. "As I told the Old Man, I do tend to stay on shore. Especially after the release of OoP. Well, let's say that I am most willing to carry a BB GUN with me, but I am not yet ready to sail the distant sea onboard the BB GUN ship." "That's okay!" says Erin brightly. "We're not even gonna have a ship. This one is more suited to a room in the Safe House, I think. And, besides, I'm pretty loyal to the trimaran. Hey, George, put Oliver's name on the list!" she hollers as Oliver at last accepts his BB GUN. In walks Eileen, looking rather wan and pale. Erin immediately falls upon her, screeching, "Eileen! Eileen! Did you hear me? I convinced Oliver to join us! Here, here, take your BB GUN, I saved one just for you!" "Do I have to carry that thing around all the time?" Eileen asks dis- spiritedly. "It looks rather akward." "No, no, you can keep it in the Safe House room whenever you're not using it!" Erin answers elatedly. She can hardly believe her luck. Eileen, one of the most respected OCELOTS in the Bay, taking a BB GUN! Eileen silently reaches for one of the weapons as Erin continues to babble at her. " I *knew* I could convince people once they heard the evidence! I know Evil!Bill's not a generally obvious spy, but it's like The Elkins said back in message #40168, 'Hey, if you don't take that Egg under the surface of the water, then how are you ever going to understand what it's really trying to tell you?' " "You are entirely too Colin Creevyish about Elkins," remarked George sniffily from behind the bar, "And it is not at all becoming." But Erin and Oliver are now grabbing Eileen's hands to form a victory circle as the three of them chant, "We believe, we believe, we believe!" No one notices the tall, shadowy figure with its long hair tied back in a ponytail and an upraised wand arm begin to take shape in a dark corner behind them. To be continued... --Erin (who would like to request that people answering this post try out the TBAY format. It doesn't have to be anything elaborate; just saying "so-and-so [your name and a brief description of your TBAY persona] popped in and said to Erin: [then making the rest of your post like normal]" will do. Though if you want to get more detailed, that would be great! Go on, try it, it's fun! Thank you!) -- and with special thanks to Oliver, who contributed several excellent ideas. Without his email support and that of everyone who's responded so far, I probably would given up in the middle of writing this, by far the longest message I've ever posted to the group. Notes on post references: The Ever So Evil Bill post part 1- message 85610 TBAY responses to Part 1 (so far)- messages 85635, 85639, 85650, 85653, 85656 Imperius!Arthur theory- messages 40168, 45290, and 77654 Evil!Lupin- messages 39362 and 35040 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 05:54:09 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 05:54:09 -0000 Subject: Holly and Yew In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85730 "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: What makes Harry and Voldemort's wands "brothers", are their core: A feather each from Fawkes the Phoenix. But the wood used in their wands differ from each other. Voldemort's is made of Yew and Harry's is made of Holly (PS p. 64-65 Bloomsbury). For fun, I looked up a little information on these trees at the www.botanical.com. > Yew: The first thing that leaps at you when you look up the info on the Yew tree, is large angry letters in red: "POISON!" Both its leaves, seed and fruit are poisonous. In history and legend of Great Britain the tree is associated with places of worship. The wood is said to resist the action of water and is very hard, and, before the use of iron became general, was greatly valued. > Holly (Holy Tree, Christ's Thorn): Is in the general mind closely connected with the festivities of Christmas. "...Pliny tells us that Holly if planted near a house or farm, repelled poison, and defended it from lightning and witchcraft..." The wood of Holly is hard, compact and of a remarkable even substance throughout... It is beautifully white, and being susceptible of a very high polish, is much prized for ornamental ware... The evenness of its grain makes it very valuable to the turner. Carol: As you say, Berit, the bit about holly repelling lightning and witchcraft is very interesting and clearly has a connection with Voldemort. It also suggests that holly and yew are worthy opponents. But what's most interesting to me is that Voldemort's wand and Harry's may be "brothers" in more than their core. Yew and holly, like young Tom Riddle, have important similarities as well as significant differences. Here's more on the yew tree from a site on Celtic imagery: "YEW. Also known as English Yew and European Yew. Another important tree to the Winter Solstice and the deities of death and rebirth. It is a beautifully smooth, gold-coloured wood with a wavy grain. The Irish used it to make dagger handles, bows and wine barrels. The wood or leaves were laid on graves as a reminder to the departed spirit that death was only a pause in life before rebirth. All parts of the tree are poisonous except the fleshy covering of the berry, and its medicinal uses include a recently discovered treatment for cancer. The yew may be the oldest-lived tree in the world. Ancient yews can be found in churchyards all over Britain, where they often pre-date even the oldest churches. There are some convincing arguments for it being the original 'World-tree' of Scandinavian mythology. The Yew may be used to enhance magical and psychic abilities, and to induce visions." Yew trees are poisonous, but they're also symbols of immortality and rebirth, which is why yew trees were planted around graveyards from Celtic times onward. They can live to a great age--thousands of years according to one site I checked. Another source said that the branches can take root in the ground and grow into new trees. Yew wood was used for bows by everybody from the Greeks to the Saxons because it was flexible and strong. Given all that, I would guess that yew wood makes a formidable wand. Its symbolism and properties tie in with Voldemort's desire for immortality and power and even, as suggested in the last sentence of the quotation, his ability to read minds. But holly, as we know, is also a symbol of immortality and resurrection, which is why it was used in rituals celebrating the winter solstice and incorporated from there into Christian symbolism, and it too would make a powerful wand. Less important but still, I think, worth mentioning is that the wood of both trees is beautiful: compare the perfectly white wood of the holly in the passage Berit quoted with the "beautifully smooth, gold-coloured wood" of the yew. No wonder Mr. Ollivander, a skilled craftsman and a connoisseur who would appreciate the fine qualities of the wood, was so proud of those wands. Both are as powerful as they are beautiful and each chooses an eleven-year-old wizard in whom it senses the potential for greatness. "I think we must expect great things from you, Mr. Potter," he says after telling Harry that Voldemort also "did great things. Terrible, yes, but great" (SS Am. ed. 85) with the "brother" wand that gave Harry his scar. Despite some superficial differences in color and length and one key difference (the poison in the yew), the wand that chose Harry is truly the "brother" of Voldemort's wand not only in its core but in the kindred properties of the holly and the yew, both of which represent immortality--as does the the phoenix feather core they share. "Unusual combination. Holly and phoenix feather," says Mr. Ollivander (SS 84). Unusual indeed. Carol, who wonders whether seven gold Galleons is an unusually high price for a wand From catlady at wicca.net Sun Nov 23 06:08:23 2003 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 06:08:23 -0000 Subject: Lupin/ShortMemory/Boar/Madam/Spy!Narcissa/Animagi/ Sirius/BonesSiblings/Puzzl Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85731 Tonks wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPfor Grownups/message/85282 : << I think. Lupin as we see in this scene and in his general dealings with Snape is very much light hearted. He doesn't seem to be very interested in anything that has to do with Snape. >> I'm quite a Remus fangirl myself; I am totally in love with dear Remus, because of his kindness, gentleness, competence, intelligence, and calmness (but no wimp he, remember him calmly, competently, rolling up his sleeves to kill Pettigrew?). I am absolutely certain that Remus isn't evil ... but I don't think that the collegial cheerfulness with which he behaves toward Snape (the way Dumbledore would want professors to behave toward one another) really means he has forgiven Snape ... I think it means he has enough self-control to make himself behave in the way that will irritate Snape all to hell. Tonks wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPfor Grownups/message/85294 : << then at St. Mungo's we see him share his compassion and knowledge with the man who was bitten by a werewolf. Again, here, we see Lupin's way with people. It is not manipulative. It is sheer compassion. >> I feel sure that Remus had a comforting word and some helpful advice for the new werewolf, but Remus went to the werewolf just then only as an excuse to walk away from Molly's temper tantrum at Arthur (over the Muggle 'stitches'), the same as the kids went for a nice cuppa as their excuse. Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPfor Grownups/message/85510 : << And poor Remus--what kind of ambition can he have, given the universal (and not entirely unjustified) prejudice against werewolves? >> He could be ambitious to overcome the prejudice against werewolves. Or he could have an ambition that doesn't much depend on public contact, like to climb Mr. Everest or write a bestselling novel or disprove Fermat's Conjecture or discover the counter-curse to Avada Kedavra. Anyway, I'm not sure that ambition *can* be "the quintessential Slytherin trait", when Crabbe and Goyle are in that House. Xani wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/85390 : << wonders if JKR realizes what she wrote in all these single, male characters - Snape, Sirius, Lupin - who are in so obvious need of regular hugs! Was she just begging for fan-fic? ;) >> I suspect that JKR, a single mother at the time, was UNconsciously reflecting her own need for regular hugs (from an adults). For that matter, I suspect that Harry's wonder and longing for his father but not his mother is UNconscious reflection of JKR's concern for her daughter's possible future need of a father. Iris wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforG rownups/message/85385 : << Yes, it's a world with a very short memory. If it wasn't, Voldemort wouldn't be there. But they forgot how it was in Grindelwald's time; they didn't want to recognize their responsibility in the existence of Dark Magic. And so it went on when Voldemort appeared. They didn't even try to change their rules when Harry defeated him once. They kept on tolerating verbal and social discrimination (snip) They didn't modify their [in]justice [system] (snip ). They kept on encouraging rivalry in their schools (snip). To cut a long story short, they didn't take the opportunity to close the door to Dark Magic, to cut off all that makes it possible (discrimination, injustice, hatred ...), maybe because they didn't want to put their society into question. >> I'd go further. It seems to me that the wizarding folk accept Dark Magic itself as an okay part of their society. We have now seen TWO rich, powerful, influential, old, *respected* wizarding families who are up to *here* in Dark Magic: the Malfoys and the Blacks. I imagine that the official viewpoint of the Ministry and the real viewpoint of many (most?) wizarding folk is: "I don't like Dark Magic, but it's a matter of personal choice" and that the viewpoint of Dark Magic practitioners and supporters is: "I *like* Dark Magic, regardless of those prudish cowards at the Ministry". I imagine that there was no law against using Dark Magic against Muggles until the Decree of Wizarding Secrecy. Canis Majorette wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85416 : << For example, the Hogwarts gate. It has two winged boars atop. The Boar was used by Sir Francis Bacon as his secret identifying symbol, >> Just as a Boar is a pun on the family name Bacon, it is a pun on the school name Hogwarts. Tracy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPfor Grownups/message/85457 : << As Lupin is the last name and Lucius is the first name - you'd have better luck tying Madam *Mal*kin (robes shop owner in Diagon Alley) to Lucius *Mal*foy, using that argument. ;-) >> I think Malkin is Madam Malkin's first name, because Malkin is a real-life first name (it's an old nickname for Molly, which originally was an old nickname for Mary). I think Madam Rosmerta is another example of a businesswoman going by her first name, as Rosmerta (said to mean 'great provider') is the name of a Gaullish goddess. I dunno about Madam Puddifoot ... Mandy wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPfor Grownups/message/85538 : << Personally I would love to find out that Draco is not really Lucius' son, >> But, as Carol wrote, canon states that there is a strong resemblance between Draco and Lucius; CoS says: "The man who followed could only be Draco's father. He had the same pale, pointed face and identical cold, gray eyes." Catherine McK wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85633 : << I'm happy with Narcissa spying on either side - just as long as she gets a good part! And if the blonde hair is a clue that she is a metamorphmagus like her niece, she could be a very good spy indeed! >> Oh, ouch! Then Draco could be a metamorphmagus and his resemblance to Lucius reveal nothing about his paternity. Iggy McSnurd wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85544 : << It's not your Animagus form that you don't actively chose, but the form of your Patronus that comes from something inside you and isn't chosen by the caster. (In some cases, it is probably chosen as an animal that you have a particular affinity for.) >> I would like to know the relationship between Animagus form Patronus form. JKR has said that she would like to be an Otter if she were an Animagus, and she gave her avatar character (Hermione) an Otter for Patronus. I also want to know, what happens if a person who has become an Animagus goes over the whole training again, from scratch, will heesh get another animal form? Can a person who is a werewolf become an Animagus? with an animal form other than wolf? Can a werewolf who is an Animagus with an animal form other than wolf avoid turning into a wolf monster at Full Moon by turning into hiser animal before the moment? << The form you become as an Animagus is not something that's "assigned" to you. It comes from what you chose to become, and often is a form that has advantages you seek out yourself. >> Annemehr replied to Iggy in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85557 : << Actually, it seems pretty certain that you *don't* get to chose your animagus form. (snip) However, Rowling has answered questions about this in chats. Here is a quote I got from the Scholastic Chat of Oct. 2000: Q: If you were Animagus, what kind of animal would you be? JKR: I'd like to be an otter -- that's my favourite animal. It would be depressing if I turned out to be a slug or something. >> Here is another JKR quote which is even more explicit: http://www.geocities.com/aberforths_goat/October_2 000_Live_Chat_America_Online.htm Q: Does the animal one turns into as an Animagi reflect your personality? JKR: Very well deduced, Narri! I personally would like to think that I would transform into an otter, which is my favorite animal. Imagine how horrible it would be if I turned out to be a cockroach! And Yolanda replied to Anne in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85586 : << One answer I came up with is that through the process of becoming an animagus, they must have gotten an idea of what kind of animal they would be. >> That would prevent the problem of unexpectedly turning into a goldfish and dying from drowning in air because of not having prepared a fishbowl to jump into. << The other is that they decided to become animagi not knowing exactly what would happen, but determined to try *something* to help Lupin. >> Yes, they decided to become animagi just to keep Remus company in the Shrieking Shack on Full Moon nights. Not only did they not know they would be able to go out and have adventures, I imagine that they didn't know yet that whether they would be able to communicate with wolf-Remus other than such animal communication as sniffing and licking each other. Natalie, who is wondry (wonderful word!), wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85207 : << Will the Trio or any other students become Animagi? >> http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/arti cles/1999/1099-pressclubtransc.html SB: We're going to take a few more questions, and um, the next one is will Harry ever turn into a shape-changer like his father? JKR: Animagus. No, Harry's not in training to be an animagus, and if you've read book three, you won't know -- um, that's a wizard that's very, very difficult to do. They learn to turn themselves into animals. No, Harry is not, Harry is going to be concentrated elsewhere, he's not going to have time to do that. He's got quite a full agenda coming up, poor boy. Of course, she could change her mind about that, as she did about Susan Bones's grandparents (below). Canis Majorette wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85588 : << I again pose the question of what it may mean that the Black brothers are named for powerful and revered stars, each with their own well developed star lore. What may be implied by each name, and the consequent relationship? >> It means that the Black family had (by then) a tradition of astronomical given names, and that Sirius's and Regulus's parents had Big Egos and intended their sons to be grow up to be superstar politicians or CEOs or such. Our beloved Sirius is named after the Dog Star; he turns into a dog and has a dog's loyal, active, but not particularly thoughtful personality. He's named after the brightest star in the heavens, and he is excessively good at attracting attention: even when trying to hide, he is eye-catching and easily found even in a crowd. The name comes from the Greek word for 'scorching' and he is a real hottie. Catherine McK wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85630 : << In fact, are there _any_ mixed-sex sibling groups other than the Weasleys? >> Yes, the older Boneses: Amelia Bones, her brother Edgar Bones who was killed by Voldemort, and Susan Bones's eponymous parent (presumably father). I am bugged that JKR previously said that it was Susan Bones's grandparents who were killed by Voldemort and now OoP says it was her uncle, his wife and family. http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/arti cles/2000/1000-livechat-barnesnoble.html Q: There is a girl named Susan Bones who was sorted in the first book, and there was a family called the Bones that Voldemort tried to destroy. Is this a coincidence, or will Harry meet her in future books? JKR: Susan Bones's grandparents were killed by Voldemort! Caipora wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85717 : << One of the puzzles was pure logic, the potions. Reading that, it took paper, pencil and fifteen minutes to see that the clues were consistent, and a bit longer to see that they were incomplete. The text didn't have enough clues. There had to be a diagram showing the heights of the bottles (or the shapes, I don't have the book here). >> Oh, yes! For years (?), I looked forward to the movie so I could *see* the potion bottles, and then the movie left out that challenge altogether! Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPfor Grownups/message/85720 : << Bellatrix, though she's some twenty-five years younger than Voldemort, may be in love with him, or at least fascinated by him, in some weird way, (snip) Her husband and brother-in-law also joined Voldemort, so whatever the attraction was (revenge for the pure bloods?), they shared it with her. Presumably it wasn't physical attraction in their case, at least. >> They may have been dragged along simply by her strength of character, altho' I'm inclined to believe that they joined because they believed in pureblood supremacy and desired personal advantage ... this links back to the ancient topic of how Voldemort recruited Death Eaters. I say, a few may have joined just to enforce pureblood supremacy, but most were attracted by some apparent offer of personal reward. Some would want power in the new Voldemortian government, and some would want cash money, and some would want LV to make them immortal like him (as if!), and some would want LV to arrange for their acquittal in their trial for some unrelated crime, and some would just enjoy the opportunity to beat up people and burn houses and kill people. From greatraven at hotmail.com Sun Nov 23 07:42:16 2003 From: greatraven at hotmail.com (sbursztynski) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 07:42:16 -0000 Subject: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85732 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" wrote: > Laura: > > >The night of the Shrieking Shack incident in PoA, Snape, as we > know, appears in the Shack. He tells the group that he found out > what was happening when he went into Remus's office to give him his > monthly wolfsbane potion and saw the Marauder's Map. (PoA p.358 > US). As soon as he grasps the situation, he goes tearing off to the > Shack. But wait a minute-what about the potion? Why didn't Snape > bring it with him? He knew that Remus would be a lethal threat to > HRH if he didn't take the stuff ASAP.< > > KathyK: > > But Snape didn't know HRH were there until he arrived at the > Shrieking Shack, or at least until he found Harry's invisibility > cloak. He says he saw Lupin running off down the passage to the > Shack and then disappearing. The Trio and Sirius were already off > the map. He only knew Lupin was up to something and suspected it > had to do with Sirius. > > Snape was in the room, though, throughout Lupin's explanation of > MWPP's experience at school with Lupin being a werewolf and the > others becoming animagi. And who knows how much he heard before > sneaking into the room? So he was able to piece a lot of things > together while Lupin spoke. > > So he didn't have any reason to worry about protecting the Trio > becuase he didn't know they were there at first. > > Laura: > > >If, on the other hand, Remus had already transformed, what did he > think he could do against a werewolf and a murderer? Why didn't he > get some backup? > > >I can only infer that Snape was so eager to nail Sirius and Remus > that he didn't really care if HRH were killed in the process. > Doesn't say much for our boy Sevvie, does it? And then he has the > nerve to paint himself as HRH's selfless rescuer. Nice, Snape, > really nice.< > > KathyK: > > > Or maybe he was hoping Lupin would have already transformed. Then > he could kill Lupin and it would be self defense. > > >Laura, wondering who Snape would have gone after first if he had > >been in the MoM that night-Sirius or Bellatrix?< > Sue B: Or maybe he had the potion in a corked phial in his pocket and wouldn't have had a chance to offer it even if he'd wanted to, or remembered during all that drama, because he was knocked out? Or he forgot and left it behind in the office in his rush to get out and find Sirius? Who knows? :-) From risako at nexusanime.com Sun Nov 23 07:40:53 2003 From: risako at nexusanime.com (Melissa McCarthy) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:40:53 -0400 Subject: Lupin's Compassion and Draco's Parentage (WAS Re: Lupin/ShortMemory/Boar/Madam/Spy!Narcissa/Animagi/ Sirius/BonesSiblings/Puzzl) References: Message-ID: <009801c3b195$20984780$6401a8c0@vaio> No: HPFGUIDX 85733 Tonks: > << then at St. Mungo's we see him share his compassion and knowledge > with the man who was bitten by a werewolf. Again, here, we see Lupin's > way with people. It is not manipulative. It is sheer compassion. >> Catlady: > I feel sure that Remus had a comforting word and some helpful advice > for the new werewolf, but Remus went to the werewolf just then only as > an excuse to walk away from Molly's temper tantrum at Arthur (over the > Muggle 'stitches'), the same as the kids went for a nice cuppa as > their excuse. You know, I interpreted his approaching the new werewolf the way Tonks did. It didn't occur to me that he was simply getting away from Molly. Well, I shall salvage my hero-worship image of Remus by reflecting that he could have gone out for a cuppa too, instead of trying to help! Maybe he even waited for a natural moment to slip away from his friends, so as not to make it too obvious to the new werewolf that he was taking pity on him... ::polishes Heroic Lupin statue:: Catherine McK: > << I'm happy with Narcissa spying on either side - just as long as she > gets a good part! And if the blonde hair is a clue that she is a > metamorphmagus like her niece, she could be a very good spy indeed! >> Catlady: > Oh, ouch! Then Draco could be a metamorphmagus and his resemblance to > Lucius reveal nothing about his paternity. But Draco couldn't have used his metamorphmagus ability from birth, and he wouldn't have known to make himself look like Lucius. Lucius would surely have been suspicious if "his" new son had, say, bright red hair (no, I don't suspect Arthur of having an affair with Narcissa! although, come to think of it, that could make a good fanfic). Is it possible that Narcissa could have disguised Draco's true appearance somehow, if he isn't Lucius's son? Any magical change might have been difficult if not impossible to hide, but there's always good old Muggle hair dye. Melissa, who thinks Draco most likely is Lucius's son but appreciates the dramatic possibilities if he isn't From diversity33 at hotmail.com Sun Nov 23 08:24:32 2003 From: diversity33 at hotmail.com (Kath Lane) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 08:24:32 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry against terrorism Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85734 >From: "nineve_laguna" >Reply-To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >To: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com >Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry against terrorism >Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:18:13 -0000 > > > The moral of the story for me? If Harry dies, it must be an >ultimate > > sacrifice to save his beloved ones, something that will make me >hold > > the book 7 tight to my chest and cry for at least 4 hours, but >still > > admiring Harry for his righteous heart that stood always >unblinkingly > > on the right side where so many would have bowed to Lord Voldemort. > > Nineve > My feeling is that it will be left open-ended whether Harry dies or not, but certain that Voldemort dies. This would be the most satisfactory from a dramatic point of view, and would leave open the possibility of sequals. K _________________________________________________________________ It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today! http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Sun Nov 23 10:56:30 2003 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 10:56:30 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess). In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85735 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "o_caipora" wrote: > > Ron can't be a better chess player or logician that Rowling is. Maybe > he can be now, but while Rowling was writing the first book she may > not have had the easy access to chess masters she presumably does now. I know this has been discussed before, but I'll try to settle a question about wizarding chess. I am a resonnably good chess player myself so I tried to figure out what the game between Ron and McGonagall's chess set looked like. After thinking about it for a while, I am 99,9% sure that : _either Ron and the chess set are extremely bad player. _either wizarding chess is completely different from ordinary chess. _either JKR did not care too much and knows about chess but did not try to make it a plausible game (of course I am 99% sure that the later is true). I would be happy to explain my evidence, but off-list as it has nothing to do with HP anymore. All the best, Olivier From belijako at online.no Sun Nov 23 13:19:01 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 13:19:01 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Organ Grinder (Fair is foul and foul is fair.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85736 Carol wrote: > To speak of someone in the third person as Lord so and so (for example > Lord Byron or Lord Tennyson) is not at all the same as addressing him > as "my lord" in person. One is a simple recognition of a title (like > referring to Elizabeth II as Queen Elizabeth), the other is an > acknowledgment of superior power or social status (like addressing the > queen as "your majesty," which few Americans would do--I can't speak > for the English). > > Granted, Voldemort's lordship is self-created, but his power over the > Death Eaters is real... Me: I think you're right Carol! Dumbledore referring to Tom as Lord Voldemort is simply a recognition of a title. But, could it be that the title is not just self-created? Maybe Voldemort can rightly call himself a lord? If he really is the Heir of Slytherin, which it seems he is (Dumbledore confirms it), then the lord-title might be justified, not just self-created. Berit From silmariel at telefonica.net Sun Nov 23 15:26:15 2003 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (Carolina) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 16:26:15 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville's Gran In-Reply-To: <000601c3afe7$78b80d60$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> References: <000601c3afe7$78b80d60$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: <200311231626.15722.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85737 joj wrote: > Which brings us to Neville. There was no purpose served by his > wand being broken. The importance of it happening, therefore, > must come in the replacing of that wand. I agree the purpose is replacing he wand, but I'd like to add it just fit the change Neville has suffered. Ignoring the 'Longbottom' part and focusing the pre OoP-Neville, he could be resumed with: apparent low magic levels, a toad and a rememberall. Now, not only he'll have a new wand, he's already lost his rememberall and Trevor is almost invisible. Neville has not changed only in character, he has new symbolism around. And he has 'flowers' from Algernon :) Silmariel And to wizards I will only say : Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 14:17:22 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 06:17:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quidditch commentator Message-ID: <20031123141722.42889.qmail@web40019.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85738 23Nov03 "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: Who do you think! will get Lee Jordan's job now that he's left Hogwarts? The Quidditch games won't be the same without a witty commmentator... Any (obvious) candidates?... Paula now (better late than never): Right you are! This has bothered me too, but I'd always imagined that JKR would have a girl commentator in the next book. Let's see, how about Luna Lovegood. She'd surely calm the masses. I don't see that the Slytherine/Gryffindor rivalry will let up, and she is a Ravenclaw, therefore a little impartial. I've always had a suspicion that there's a quirky sense of humor in her somewhere too. Maybe she's just what Hogwart's needs now. Remember the Sorting Hat's warning to ban together. Or, if you've a taste for drama--what about Pansy Parkinson? Since there are no girls on Slytherine's team, she be their token female. Oh, boy, this could really galvanize Hermione's ethusiasm for Quidditch. I could imagine some real action from this choice. Finally, maybe one of the Patil twins. They're both pretty even personalities and probably wouldn't offend anybody. Gee, my imagination's going wild! Can't wait to find out. ~Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 14:20:29 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 06:20:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess) Message-ID: <20031123142029.92104.qmail@web40006.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85739 23Nov03 "o_caipora" wrote: ...Something's bothered me since the first book, and I hope someone has an answer.One of the puzzles was pure logic, the potions. Reading that, it took paper, pencil and fifteen minutes to see that the clues were consistent, and a bit longer to see that they were incomplete. The text didn't have enough clues. There had to be a diagram showing the heights of the bottles (or the shapes, I don't have the book here).... Paula now: Humm..., now you've got me really puzzled. Seems like first time I read the American version, second time the British. Unfortunately, don't have either one here now. But I distinctly remember working out the puzzle as you said with pencil and paper, before reading the answer, and coming up with the right answer (Yes, I'm a little nuts, I go in for things like this.). What gives? Must get my hands on one of the editions again. By the way, American books are generally more illustrated than British. And now that I think of it, seems like there was a diagram in the American version. ~Paula "Griff" Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lb140900 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 14:38:48 2003 From: lb140900 at yahoo.com (Louis Badalament) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:38:48 -0000 Subject: Luna Lovegood and the Grey Lady Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85740 Does anybody here remember the Grey Lady? She's supposed to be the Ravenclaw ghost. The thing is, I got to thinking, and I decided I could see a scenario take place. If Luna Lovegood is truly as much a part of Harry Potter's team as Hermione and Ron is (as the ending of Order of the Phoenix would seem to suggest) then what might happen somewhere in Book Six is this: Luna, one day, leads her Gryffindor friends to the Ravenclaw common room, for whatever reason. There, they meet the Grey Lady of Ravenclaw House who could, potentially, play an important role in the future of the plot. Or she could be what she's been so far - an incidental character; nonetheless, I think this would be a good place to meet for Harry to meet the Lady properly. What do you all think? - Louis Badalament From patnkatng at cox.net Sun Nov 23 15:47:05 2003 From: patnkatng at cox.net (Katrina) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:47:05 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: <1069491700.8347.4.camel@Bujold_RH> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85741 Amura wrote: I was thinking Sirius might hide in Bermuda :P Then Katrina added: Couldn't have been Bermuda. . . What about Australia? They have some big, flashy birds there, too. Angel considers: What about Madagascar - It's a haven for exotic plants and wildlife. A lot of the botanic gardens in the UK, particularly Kew, have a Madagascar appeal going, because so much of the Flora and Fauna are novel, and used in native medicine. (I add the botanic gardens bit, because JKR is known to frequent them.) Now Katrina wonders: What if, instead of being somewhere exotic, he was hiding in one of the botanical gardens? What if he was in Kew, for example? Certainly easier to get back to Hogwarts when he was needed. From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Nov 23 16:02:21 2003 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 23 Nov 2003 16:02:21 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1069603341.28.37975.m8@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85742 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, November 23, 2003 Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CST (GMT-06:00) Hi everyone! Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. *Chat times are not changing for Daylight Saving/Summer Time.* Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. Go into any Yahoo chat room and type /join HP:1 For further info, see the Humongous BigFile, section 3.3. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/hbfile.html#33 Hope to see you there! From extreme_0210 at yahoo.com.mx Sun Nov 23 06:22:20 2003 From: extreme_0210 at yahoo.com.mx (o.g.p.) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 06:22:20 -0000 Subject: tragical endings and a question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85744 Hi everybody, I'm the new guy, so let me introduce myself. My name is Odil and I'm writing from Mexico. Why isn't HP able to resist the effect of the touch of Voldemort? Is this something to do with the scar or the protection of Lily's sacrifice? If so what kind of protection is that? Imagine this ending: Sister wands = no damage between HP and LV, but what if HP is possessed by LV and then some kind of spell that compels both of them to stay together. Who is going to survive? extreme_0210 From entropymail at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 19:10:29 2003 From: entropymail at yahoo.com (entropymail) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 19:10:29 -0000 Subject: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85745 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" wrote: > > >I can only infer that Snape was so eager to nail Sirius and Remus > > that he didn't really care if HRH were killed in the process. > > Doesn't say much for our boy Sevvie, does it? And then he has the > > nerve to paint himself as HRH's selfless rescuer. Nice, Snape, > > really nice. But why was Snape so dead-set against Black being freed? It was so important to Snape that he get Black back to the dementors for the kiss that he was willing to forego any explanation from anyone -- didn't even want to entertain the possibility that he might have gotten the story wrong. Seems that Snape was acting purely emotionally, rather than logically. Perhaps revenge? But Snapes's reckless actions to have Sirius "kissed" seem to go beyond a childhood grudge over a reckless prank. Which leads me to (sorry, folks) the "Snape loves Lily" theory. This seems to be a logical reason (makes sense to me) for Snape's blind fury at Sirius. If Snape has believed all along that Sirius was the Potter's secret keeper, then he has been blaming Sirius and stewing over the loss of the love of his life, Lily, for twelve long years. Or, being a Voldie insider, he may even have been privy to the fact that Pettigrew was a spy, funneling information to the Death Eaters whenever he could. So even if he knew after the fact that Peter had been the Potter's true secret keeper, he may have still blamed Sirius for being so stupid as to pass on this sacred trust to someone who was so obviously untrustworthy. :: Entropy :: From sploogal at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 10:26:35 2003 From: sploogal at yahoo.com (sploogal) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 10:26:35 -0000 Subject: Sirius can't be dead Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85746 Hi! Sploogal here. I was absolutely distraught when I read the bit where Sirius supposedly dies - I cried for hours! (He was my favorite character.) I refused to even look at the book for a month afterwards. I've been doing some thinking though, and I don't think that he really is dead at all - it just seems that way. First of all, the whole of PoA centres around Sirius and introducing him as James' best friend and a very loyal and trustworthy person. Yes, PoA is about other stuff as well, but one of the main things in it is Sirius. If JKR has devoted an entire book to Sirius, it seems unlikely that she would kill him off two books later without a really good reason. Can anybody think of a really good reason as to why Sirius had to be killed? I can think of a lot more reasons for him to stay alive, one of the most important of these being that he's a father-figure to Harry. He's the person that Harry turns to for advice and comfort. Also, in GoF, when Cedric Diggory was killed, it states that "He was dead." immediately. Other characters later say out loud that Cedric is dead. When Sirius 'dies', nobody actually says out loud that he is dead except for Harry. You'd expect Dumbledore to say something about it, wouldn't you? Lupin saw Sirius 'die' and seemed to react a little to calmly to the loss of his last remaining friend from his time at Hogwarts. Perhaps that is just because of the type of person that he is, or he was in shock, but I don't think so. Another interesting point is that the curse that hit Sirius was not a killing curse - it was just a stunner. Sure, it sent him flying through the veil, but we don't actually know anything about the veil, do we? Hmmmm... maybe I'm still in denial, but I really don't believe that Sirius is dead. From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Sun Nov 23 10:39:26 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: 23 Nov 2003 10:39:26 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess). In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1069583971.17270.4.camel@Bujold_RH> No: HPFGUIDX 85747 Olivier wrote: > Ron can't be a better chess player or logician that Rowling is. Maybe > he can be now, but while Rowling was writing the first book she may > not have had the easy access to chess masters she presumably does now. I know this has been discussed before, but I'll try to settle a question about wizarding chess. I am a reasonably good chess player myself so I tried to figure out what the game between Ron and McGonagall's chess set looked like. After thinking about it for a while, I am 99,9% sure that : _either Ron or the chess set is an extremely bad player, _ or wizarding chess is completely different from ordinary chess, _or JKR did not care too much and knows about chess but did not try to make it a plausible game (I am 99% sure that the latter is true). I would be happy to explain my evidence, but off-list as it has nothing to do with HP anymore. I don't think that the chess is so bad, so much as the fact that Ron had to take into consideration that he had three humans on the board. That gives the game a different flavour. It's like saying there are three pieces you aren't allowed to lose. I did it to a friend of mine, who also commented on the chess, and is a good player, and he struggled, not because he's not good, but because it shifted the parameters. I keep meaning to post my theory of chess in relation to the game, but haven't got it all written up yet. Angel From kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 23 19:43:25 2003 From: kirst_inn at yahoo.co.uk (Kirstini) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 19:43:25 -0000 Subject: Sirius can't be dead In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85748 Sploogal wrote: >>I was absolutely distraught when I read the bit where Sirius supposedly dies - I cried for hours! (He was my favorite character.) I refused to even look at the book for a month afterwards. I've been doing some thinking though, and I don't think that he really is dead at all - it just seems that way.>> Whether Sirius really died or not has been a favourite topic on this list ever since we all recovered from post-OoP shock. Some of the messages any posters interested in this topic might like to have a look at are those started by the message "Why it had to be Sirius", which can be found at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/75651 Of course, there's always Terry's ship the USS SAD DENIAL for those ferverent believers. The first TBay post of the SAD DENIAL crew was here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/66464 Reading around these posts, and those threads spawned by them, will help anyone new to the group (or anyone who has spent the last few months under a rock with their fingers in their ears) get a fair idea of previous discussions on the topic. Hope this helps. Kirstini From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 23 19:36:59 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 19:36:59 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore, Organ Grinder (Fair is foul and foul is fair.) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85749 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: Berit: > I think you're right Carol! Dumbledore referring to Tom as Lord > Voldemort is simply a recognition of a title. But, could it be that > the title is not just self-created? Maybe Voldemort can rightly call > himself a lord? If he really is the Heir of Slytherin, which it seems > he is (Dumbledore confirms it), then the lord-title might be > justified, not just self-created. Geoff: Well, yes..... but the name "Lord Voldemort" was created from an anagram. If he can claim the title of Lord - which I seriously doubt - then he could have called himself Lord Slytherin, Lord Hogwarts or Lord Tom Noddy or something. Geoff From o_caipora at yahoo.com Sun Nov 23 19:55:51 2003 From: o_caipora at yahoo.com (o_caipora) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 19:55:51 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess). In-Reply-To: <1069583971.17270.4.camel@Bujold_RH> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85750 Angel Moules wrote: > I don't think that the chess is so bad, so much as > the fact that Ron had to take into consideration > that he had three humans on the board. That > gives the game a different flavour. It's like saying there are three > pieces you aren't allowed to lose. Contrast with another author who wrote for children, Lewis Carrol. "Through the Looking Glass" is written as a chess game, and IIRC the moves all work. Carrol also wrote on logic. His "Elementary Logic" uses some extremely funny examples. That's educationally useful: the point of logic is to separate the syntax (the form) from the semantics (the content). If you're trying to teach formal logic, you don't want students to think about the meaning, so you don't try to prove the existence of God, etc. (It's kind of like using Lorem Ipsum in magazine layouts.) Carrol's kind of logic, syllogisms, comes from Aristotle. It's obsolete, nowadays we use symbolic logic, which is more powerful. Even so, Carrol's logic is enough to see that the potion problem lacks sufficient clues to solve. If Rowling were to write something like that again, an editor would surely catch it. But before Volume 1 came out and caught on, she may not have merited that kind of review. I think the failure to adequately describe the potion puzzle shows a genuine limitation on Rowling's part. It's a very simple problem. If the chess game, in the same part of the same book, seems to suffer from limitation, well then it's got company. - Caipora From amani at charter.net Sun Nov 23 21:11:12 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 16:11:12 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius can't be dead References: Message-ID: <003301c3b206$53c25b20$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85751 Sploogal: I was absolutely distraught when I read the bit where Sirius supposedly dies - I cried for hours! (He was my favorite character.) I refused to even look at the book for a month afterwards. I've been doing some thinking though, and I don't think that he really is dead at all - it just seems that way. Taryn: Why would JKR have been so distraught about it if he was not actually dead? (I've been looking, but does anyone know that old article from before OotP came out with JKR talking about talking to her husband and crying about it after she wrote it? Can't seem to dig it up.) Sploogal: First of all, the whole of PoA centres around Sirius and introducing him as James' best friend and a very loyal and trustworthy person. Yes, PoA is about other stuff as well, but one of the main things in it is Sirius. If JKR has devoted an entire book to Sirius, it seems unlikely that she would kill him off two books later without a really good reason. Can anybody think of a really good reason as to why Sirius had to be killed? Taryn: Sometimes the best reason is there isn't a good reason at all. Death doesn't pick and choose. Sirius is a death that is extremely emotional for Harry without totally destroying the balance of the books, like the death of one of the Trio would. Sploogal: I can think of a lot more reasons for him to stay alive, one of the most important of these being that he's a father-figure to Harry. He's the person that Harry turns to for advice and comfort. Also, in GoF, when Cedric Diggory was killed, it states that "He was dead." immediately. Other characters later say out loud that Cedric is dead. When Sirius 'dies', nobody actually says out loud that he is dead except for Harry. Taryn: You could say Lupin's reaction is pretty evident. "He's gone" seems just a softer waying of saying, "He's dead." And Lupin knows what the Veil is--death. Hence why he wouldn't release Harry to go through it after Sirius. Sploogal: You'd expect Dumbledore to say something about it, wouldn't you? Taryn: He does. "It is MY fault that Sirius died," said Dumbledore clearly. (OotP American Hardback, pg. 825) And... "Am I to understand," said Phineas Nigellus slowly from Harry's left, "that my great-great-grandson--the last of the Blacks--is dead?" "Yes, Phineas," said Dumbledore. (pg. 826) Sploogal: Lupin saw Sirius 'die' and seemed to react a little to calmly to the loss of his last remaining friend from his time at Hogwarts. Perhaps that is just because of the type of person that he is, or he was in shock, but I don't think so. Taryn: Lupin's reaction has bit quite a point of speculation. I think it's important we didn't see his immediate reaction when Sirius fell through the veil. I think he was partly in shock and the only thing he could think to do was keep Harry from going after Sirius. Sometimes, at such an emotional climax, people can only work on instinct, and Lupin's instinct was to keep Harry safe. Sploogal: Another interesting point is that the curse that hit Sirius was not a killing curse - it was just a stunner. Sure, it sent him flying through the veil, but we don't actually know anything about the veil, do we? Taryn: Not directly, I suppose, but it seems pretty clear that it's Death. Hence the phrase, "Passing beyond the veil" and the chapter title "Beyond the Veil" as well. --Taryn [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kate_bag at hotmail.com Sun Nov 23 20:11:06 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 20:11:06 -0000 Subject: Sirius can't be dead In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85752 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "sploogal" wrote: > Hi! Sploogal here. > I was absolutely distraught when I read the bit where Sirius > supposedly dies - I cried for hours! (He was my favorite character.) > I refused to even look at the book for a month afterwards. > I've been doing some thinking though, and I don't think that he really > is dead at all - it just seems that way. > First of all, the whole of PoA centres around Sirius and introducing > him as James' best friend and a very loyal and trustworthy person. > Yes, PoA is about other stuff as well, but one of the main things in > it is Sirius. If JKR has devoted an entire book to Sirius, it seems > unlikely that she would kill him off two books later without a really > good reason. Can anybody think of a really good reason as to why > Sirius had to be killed? > I can think of a lot more reasons for him to stay alive, one of the > most important of these being that he's a father-figure to Harry. > He's the person that Harry turns to for advice and comfort. Now Kate - I think that we have yet to see the true effect that the death of Sirius has on Harry. Like everything in Rowling's books, this point is going to come up again and again, and I believe that (as much as you don't want to think it's true), Sirius is really gone. First of all, Rowling herself says that she cried and cried after she killed of Sirius. I doubt she would have reacted in such a way if she knew he wasn't really gone. Second, I do believe Dumbledore, in a secondary way, tells us that Sirius is gone. When he is talking to Fudge at the end of OoP (in the MoM after the fight with Voldemort), he tells Fudge that he can "...find several escaped Death Eaters contained in the *Death Chamber* bound by an Anti-Disapparation Jinx..." (OoP, UK ed, p 721 - emphasis mine). We know that these Death Eaters are contained in the room with the veil; thus this room is apparently the "Death Chamber" Dumbledore is talking about. We know that in the Department of Mystries, the unspeakables study love, time, thought...why not death? And note that just as Ron was affected by the thought contained in that room, and just as the death eater was affected by time in its room, Sirius is also affected by death in the Death Chamber. > Also, in GoF, when Cedric Diggory was killed, it states that "He was > dead." immediately. Other characters later say out loud that Cedric > is dead. > When Sirius 'dies', nobody actually says out loud that he is dead > except for Harry. Now me - If you remember, many people *try* to tell Harry that Sirius is dead, but Harry won't hear any of it...Lupin himself tries to day the words, but Harry cuts him off. I would further argue that the death of Cedric Diggory served seemingly "no purpose" at first, but when we look back of book 4 after having read book 5, we see the death was indeed important. This is how I think the death of Sirius will play out in book 6. Having said all of this, I hope you are right in that Sirius isn't dead, he was one of my favourite characters...I just am not letting myself have any hope at all of his coming back so I won't be disappointed if he does. ~Kate From t.forch at mail.dk Sun Nov 23 21:44:01 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 22:44:01 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Sirius can't be dead In-Reply-To: <003301c3b206$53c25b20$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031123223627.03340990@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 85753 At 16:11 23-11-03 -0500, Taryn Kimel wrote: >Taryn: >Why would JKR have been so distraught about it if he was not actually >dead? (I've been looking, but does anyone know that old article from >before OotP came out with JKR talking about talking to her husband and >crying about it after she wrote it? Can't seem to dig it up.) Try this: The whole interview starts here: It's with Jeremy Paxman and was, IIRC, out a few days before the release of OotP. >Sploogal: >Can anybody think of a really good reason as to why Sirius had to be killed? In an interview in the Boston radio show "The Connection", Rowling said, JKR: Erm - again - I - I - this sounds like a huge cop-out, but it's - it's hard for me to give you the full picture without ruining future plots, and - because there are kids out there that are /so/ attuned to these books that if I say 'well, you might just find out x, y or z' they'll think 'ah -right, so-and-so's going to die, so-and-so is obviously going to learn to do this' you know that - that they'll just know, so I have to be careful what I say. Erm ... Harry is someone is forced for such a young person to make his own choices. He has very limited access to truly caring adults - and he /is/ guided by his conscience. Now, Harry makes mistakes, repeatedly, erm Harry ha- ... did things like ... he did - he did steal the flying car, that was a very stupid thing to do, he - but it seemed like a great idea at the time, we've all been there - er - but ultimately Harry is guided by his conscience. I believe Sirius had to go because Harry was starting to depend on him too much. Troels From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Sun Nov 23 22:48:29 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 22:48:29 -0000 Subject: Neville's name (was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85754 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatelderone" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mom31" wrote: > > Which brings us to Neille. There was no purpose served by his > wand being broken. The importance of it happening, therefore, must > come in the replacing of that wand. There must be either an > improvement with the new wand, or we find out something about the old > wand or if Gran will "kill him" for breaking it. It just seems very > significant to me. > > GEO: Yes there was. The breaking of the wand symbolized Neville > growing out of his father's shadow and becoming his own man or > wizard. It's very similar to Luke losing his father's lightsaber in > the duel against Vader in Empire Strikes Back or King Arthur > shattering his father's blade in battle so that the Lady of the Lake > could give him excalibur. I like this parallel! Is Neville the boy who really will defeat voldemort? By the way, could someone tell me what "Neville" means? (sorry for being so lazy, but actually I don't have enough free time to check the archives) Where does this name come from, and how do you pronounce it in english? Thanks for your help, Amicalement, Iris From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Sun Nov 23 23:24:47 2003 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 23:24:47 -0000 Subject: TBAY! ESE!Bill Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85755 This is a continuation to the posts #85729 and #85650 "You know, Erin, I think it is time we took a small walk outside; there is = something that makes me feel uncomfortable in here" says Olivier after he, Eileen, an= d?Erin had finished their little victory dance. "What? You don't like beer?" asks an obviously high-spirited Erin. "No, no that's not the problem" Olivier's voice turns into a whisper before= he goes on, "it's just that I wanted to add something concerning ESE!Bill and Snape, an= d I would hate to throw down a new Snape theory right in front of George." The two of them walk outside, proudly clutching their BB GUN and screaming = random PARTY LINE slogans?at the?top of their voices, completely oblivious?to the = tall, dark figure in?the dragon-leather outfit?who is stealthily following them. As th= ey walk along the calm-looking seaside, Erin finally asks: "So what is it you wanted to tell me about Snape ?" "It was actually you that made me think about it. Remember that teenaged Di= stressed! Bill is feeling drawn more and more to this mysterious Head of Slytherin, t= he Potions or DADA teacher. He starts to think that the triumph of Voldemort is inevit= able; just like Peter, he reckons the Dark Lord is taking over everywhere. ? "And then suddenly everything changed: Voldemort vanished, his mentor died = or was sent to Azkaban and a new teacher arrived at Hogwarts. How much does Bill k= now about Snape? I would say a lot, he is a very clever boy and his father work= s at the ministry, so my bet is he knows everything about the DE trials. Plus we hav= e evidence from Sirius in GoF that these trials have profoundly affected the Wizarding= World" Olivier says. Contemplating his brand new BB GUN, he continues: "So Bill knows that Snape was a Death Eater and that Dumbledore has vouched= for him. And Snape, being the astute, ready-minded man we know immediately susp= ects this Gryffindor who seems to hang around with Slytherins most of his time."= ********************************* "Bill doesn't like him either," said Ginny, as though that settled the matter." *********************************OoP, Ch. 4 "It fits beautifully in the picture, doesn't it ? And thats why Snape never= stays after the meetings, not because it does not want to see Sirius- quite the contrary in= fact, he enjoys taunting him whenever he can- but because he's too suspicious of Bil= l." Erin waits silently for a while then mutters : "This is turning a bit scary= . The woes of Mrs. Weasley have not yet come to an end, I'm afraid." "Oh well" says Olivier, "maybe we could pay a visit to some less tragic par= t of the Bay one of these days. An Imperio'd!Arthur killing one of his own children in f= ront of Bill, thereby turning him to the Dark Side, is a bit too sadistic to me. I was al= ready devastated by Sirius' death, see. Besides, it is not like ESE!Bill is alrea= dy stalking the Bay, trying to silence or discredit us BB GUN bearers." With a swish of cloak, the mysterious man who had been listening from afar = disappears in the dark of the night. All the best, Olivier, who in turn wishes to thank Erin for introducing me to the Theory Bay From catlady at wicca.net Mon Nov 24 00:56:25 2003 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 00:56:25 -0000 Subject: Neville's name (was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85756 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "iris_ft" wrote: > By the way, could someone tell me what "Neville" means? (sorry for > being so lazy, but actually I don't have enough free time to check > the archives) Where does this name come from, and how do you > pronounce it in english? Neville rhymes with Devil. I looked it up in http://www.behindthename.com for you: << From a surname which was originally derived from a place name meaning "new town" in Norman French. >> From valkyrievixen at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 01:25:07 2003 From: valkyrievixen at yahoo.com (M.Clifford) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 01:25:07 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85757 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katrina" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Amura" wrote: > > > > I was thinking Sirius might hide in Bermuda :P > > > Now Katrina adds: > > Couldn't have been Bermuda. What about Australia? They have > some big, flashy birds there, too. > Valky: Yeah we do have big Flashy birds in Aus but none that fit the description of Sirius' message bird. A large colourful bird with a large bill. Our colourful birds are mostly small billed and vice versa for the large billed being not colourful. I guess I advocate for the Madagascar theory. and I wonder what significance it might have to the plot. Any enhancements out there? or were we simply doing this for its own end? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 02:58:49 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 02:58:49 -0000 Subject: Neville's Gran In-Reply-To: <000601c3afe7$78b80d60$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85758 > Carol: > > >I don't think we've really looked closely into the results from Ron's > new wand. Obviously it works better than the broken one, which > backfired to make him eat slugs and to wipe out Lockhart's memory. I > think JKR just takes the new wand for granted. Does Ron have problems > with his used wand in SS/PS, before it's broken? (Movie contamination > here--I can see him turning Scabbers into a furry cup with a tail. > Does something like that happen in the book, and if so is it in PS?SS > or CS?) Anyway, just because Ron doesn't say, "Oh! I'm so happy to > have my own wand!" doesn't mean that the new wand doesn't suit him > better than the old one. It's like a new pair of shoes. If they pinch > your feet, you notice them. If they fit, you take them for granted. I > think that's what's happening here. Ron's new wand works fine. He's > stopped wreaking havoc. Why mention it? > > > Joj : > > That's true, but I was trying to point out the differences in the reasons why both wands were broken in the first place. > > Ron's wand broke to serve the plot. It was kind of a running gag, until the real purpose was revealed at the end. It rebounded the memory charm back onto Lockhart. Not a humongous plot point, but certainly the reason JKR wrote Ron's wand being broken. > > Which brings us to Neille. There was no purpose served by his wand being broken. The importance of it happening, therefore, must come in the replacing of that wand. There must be either an improvement with the new wand, or we find out something about the old wand or if Gran will "kill him" for breaking it. It just seems very significant to me. Carol again: I agree with you. The "purpose" for Neville's wand being broken has to be its replacement with a wand of his own, which will suit him better. My point was only that just because JKR didn't mention the improvement in Ron's spell casting after he got his own wand doesn't mean that there *wasn't* an improvement (as some people have argued) or that we can discount Ollivander's "the wand chooses the wizard" statement, which is extremely important with relation to Harry's and Voldemort's "brother" wands. I'm certain that Neville will get much better results with his own wand, and that improvement along with the increased self-confidence we've already seen in him will make a huge difference. (He was also handicapped by a bleeding nose in the DoM scene, which prevented all his "Stubefy!" spells from working. He did the best he could, though, and even made a catch worthy of a Seeker when Harry tossed him the Prophecy. (Not worth looking up the page number, but the passage jumped out at me when I was reviewing OoP last night.) BTW, after researching holly and yew last night, I'll be very interested in seeing what kind of wood Neville's new wand is made of. I hope JKR tells us! Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 03:46:39 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 03:46:39 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's animus toward the Potters/the prophecy (was Replay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85759 "Diana" wrote: Apologies for snipping so much of your post, but this paragraph jumped out at me. Harry needs > time to learn and grow so he will be capable of taking on Voldemort > and killing him when the time comes (book 7, of course). And > keeping the prophecy secret from Voldemort will give Harry that all- > important time to become Voldemort's murderer. > I find this idea very disturbing. Yes, Harry needs time, but not to learn to become a murderer. Not to become Tom Riddle III. Not to yield the high moral ground that separates him from Tom Riddle, not to learn to hate when what (presumably) makes him superior to Voldemort is his capacity for love. Other wizards, Snape for example, could hit Voldemort with an Avada Kedavra, but that clearly isn't going to work. Harry has to be able to do something only he has the ability to do, something related to the spiritual kinship between him and Voldemort that is reflected in their wands. Somehow he must figure out a way to make Voldemort destroy himself. What no one seems to have noticed about the prophecy is the line, "Neither can live while the other survives." The meaning in that line is clear enough when it comes to Voldemort: He isn't really living and hasn't been since he was vaporized. I'm not even sure he was really living before that since, after becoming a murderer at seventeen, he went through so many transformations that he was barely recognizable. So if Voldemort could somehow manage to kill Harry, he would be able to *live* as a human being again (evil but alive and real and human). I can't see that happening. If, on the other hand, Harry causes Voldemort to die (without casting an unforgiveable curse or doing anything that will place him on Voldemort's level, he also will be able to *live*--as, according to the prophecy, he isn't doing now. ("Neither can live while the other survives.") So that seems to me that he will not only survive the encounter (no passing through the veil to join Sirius), but he will find a meaningful, even joyful existence for the first time in his life. If he becomes a junior version of Barty Crouch Sr., using the Dark Lord's methods to fight Voldemort for personal gain (in his case, revenge and possibly glory), where is the joy? Where is the victory? What kind of lesson would the millions of children who idolize Harry learn if he, too, became a murderer? Whatever happens in the end, I think that Harry's physical *and moral* victory over Voldemort will give new meaning to the words, "The Boy Who Lived." Carol From LWalshETAL at aol.com Sun Nov 23 23:19:28 2003 From: LWalshETAL at aol.com (LWalshETAL at aol.com) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 18:19:28 EST Subject: Anagram for Albus Percival Wulfric Brian Dumbledore? Message-ID: <1eb.13f880e4.2cf29a80@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85760 Has anyone tried to make an anagram out of Dumbledore's full name? Actually, I should say, has anyone succeeded? I have tried, but haven't found anything of particular interest just yet. Laura Walsh LWalshETAL at aol.com [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From RON_REID at NETZERO.NET Mon Nov 24 00:56:20 2003 From: RON_REID at NETZERO.NET (RON_REID at NETZERO.NET) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 00:56:20 +0000 Subject: Neville to kill VM? Message-ID: <112420030056.22435.341c@att.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85761 We all know that the last word in book 7 is scar. What if Neville kills LV and gets a scar in during the fight in exchange for killing him. The prophecy would still be correct. There is nothing about the marking of his equal as a child. All the rest of the prophecy still fits Neville, and DD said that the prophecy was renamed by the MOM keeper after the attack on Harry believing that Harry is "the one." What do you all think???? Ron From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 04:06:31 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 04:06:31 -0000 Subject: - Rabastan (was: The Gang of Slytherins) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85762 Carol: > > There's still the question of what he's doing in the book and why > > there are so many pairs of brothers (Albus and Aberforth, Regulus and > > Sirius, Rodolphus and Rabastan), all with more or less matching names > > but in some cases, contrasting personalities. (I'm waiting now for > > Lupin's brother, Romulus.) Catherine McK: > Not to mention Gideon and Fabian Prewitt (named for social reform > societies?), and sisters Parvati and Padma. There are alos the Baddock > and Creavey brothers. In fact, are there _any_ mixed-sex sibling > groups other than the Weasleys? > > Maybe the Lestranges had a German mother - descent from Grindelwald, > perhaps? Carol again: Interesting theory on the Lestranges. Maybe their mother was educated at Durmstrang. I can think of one other pairing of same-sex children (with a nine-year gap between them): Fleur and Gabrielle. (Must be the Veela blood. Maybe there aren't any pure blooded Veelas because they're all female and have to marry wizards. I'm joking, everyone.) But you're right; there don't seem to be any sister/brother pairings other than Ginny and her brothers. In fact, many of the Hogwarts students appear to be only children. I don't remember the Baddocks. Who are they? Carol, who is still expecting Romulus to show up in Book 6 From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 04:54:00 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 04:54:00 -0000 Subject: About a messy post, . . . In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85763 Iris wrote: > > 1) Thanks to Harry, Good and Evil will come to a kind of status quo > (neither Harry nor Voldemort can defeat the other without dying, and > we already saw how they happened to neutralize each other because of > their brother wands). Sorry for the huge snip and thanks for your thoughtful response to my post, but I had to respond to this one item. The Prophecy does *not* say that neither Harry nor Voldemort can defeat the other without dying, which virtually guarantees an unhappy ending with the hero dead along with the villain. JKR would never reveal her plans so overtly and I for one would stop reading: Okay, Harry has to die in order to destroy Voldemort. Why bother to read more? What the Prophecy actually says is "either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives" (OoP Am. ed. 841). In other words, one will have to die at the hand of the other, not both will kill the other. And if one survives, he will be able to *live*--as he has evidently not yet done. I said something like this in a longer post about how Harry might cause Voldemort to die without becoming a murderer himself, but it seems to fit well here as well. Carol, who is trying to type and talk on the phone at the same time and hopes this post is coherent From ladypensieve at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 04:54:25 2003 From: ladypensieve at yahoo.com (Lady Pensieve) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 04:54:25 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's animus toward the Potters/the prophecy (was Replay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85764 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote > > Whatever happens in the end, I think that Harry's physical *and moral*victory over Voldemort will give new meaning to the words,"The Boy Who Lived." Carol<< I agree with Carol. Rowling is a teacher...she's trying to get a point across...also, remember what Dumbledore said... "Merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit.." Does anyone believe Dumbledore couldn't have killed Tom if he wanted to? There's more afoot than that. Killing Voldemort won't end the evil if a lesson isn't learned...It'll be interesting to see how JKR concludes this mystery. Kathy From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Mon Nov 24 05:13:41 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 23:13:41 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's name (was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c3b249$bdcd2200$08ea79a5@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 85765 > Iris >By the way, could someone tell me what "Neville" means? (sorry for >being so lazy, but? actually I don't have enough free time to check >the archives) Where does this name come from, and how do you >pronounce it in english? Izzy here: Here are a few name meanings I pulled up from AmericanBaby.com Neville: Origin: "Old French" Meaning: from the new town Traits: Most people picture Neville as an Englishman who is either a rich, suave sophisticate, or a quiet, absent-minded professor. Famous people with this name: British statesman Neville Chamberlain; actor Neville (Laredo) Brand; novelist Nevil (On the Beach) Shute; conductor Neville Marriner (the second one of the Traits listing seems like a definite possibility for our good Mr. Longbottom...) Harry: Origin: "Old English" Meaning: soldier Traits: Most people say Harry is an older blue-collar dad who is friendly, funny, and happy-go-lucky. Some, though, see Harry as a serious businesslike man with a bad temper. Famous people with this name: movie cop "Dirty Harry" Callahan; singer Harry ("Day-O") Belafonte; actors Harry (L.A. Law) Hamlin, Harry (M*A*S*H) Morgan; bandleader Harry James; President Harry Truman; movies The Trouble with Harry, When Harry Met Sally And from ParentsPlace.com I got this information: Hermione, a 3-syllable girl's name of Greek origin, means: Messenger; of the earth. Entertainers with this name include Hermione Baddeley (Stage/Theater). Nicknames for Hermione are Hermia, Hermine and Herminia. Other names associated with Hermione are Erma, Hermina and Ione. Ronald, a 2-syllable boy's name of Norse origin, means: One with powerful authority. Ronald's ethnic backgrounds include Irish and English/Welsh. Historical figures with this name include Ronald Wilson Reagan (US Presidents). Nicknames for Ronald are Raghnall, Ranald and Ronny. Other names associated with Ronald are Renaldo, Ron and Ronnie. Iggy McSnurd From tiggersong at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 05:22:51 2003 From: tiggersong at yahoo.com (tiggersong) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 05:22:51 -0000 Subject: Neville's Gran; Was: Neville and the Clean Break In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85766 Entropy wrote Snippage of bboy's great comments on Neville. Then, from Entropy: > This is, of course, assuming that Gran is just Neville's loving, if > misguided, caretaker. However, if you believe that she is truly > Evil!Gran, then her actions take on a new and sinister meaning. What > if she is actually putting Neville down with the hopes of keeping > his confidence so low that he doesn't question his near-squiblike > lack of magical talent? If Neville believes in his heart that his > talents are negligible, then he wouldn't even question why he has > to use his father's wand, and wonder if he would do better after a > proper visit to Ollivander's. Snippy > One final thought: perhaps her motives for keeping Neville in a > bumbling state are not so evil after all. If Voldemort knows that > Neville is near to useless as a wizard can come, and his parents > remain in a curse-induced stupor, then he certainly would have > little or no interest in harming the family any further. Now, me. For some reason, this thought just struck me. And, yes, this one hurt. What if she is vaguely Evil!Gran (even if she's Evil!Gran for "good" reasons.)? What if SHE'S the one keeping her son and daughter-in-law cursed and in St. Mungo's? You know, to "protect" them. As Entropy said, if Voldemort thinks that Frank-and-Alice are insane, then he thinks they're no threat. How evil would a person have to be to drug people to "help" them? (Don't answer that; I know something of the history of mental health care.) Stasia who's never before truly subscribed to any of the ESE!whoever threads From idcre at imap2.asu.edu Mon Nov 24 11:15:26 2003 From: idcre at imap2.asu.edu (backstagemystic) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:15:26 -0000 Subject: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85767 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" wrote: >>The night of the Shrieking Shack incident in PoA, Snape, as we know, appears in the Shack. He tells the group that he found out what was happening when he went into Remus's office to give him his monthly wolfsbane potion and saw the Marauder's Map. (PoA p.358 US). As soon as he grasps the situation, he goes tearing off to the Shack. But wait a minute-what about the potion? Why didn't Snape bring it with him? He knew that Remus would be a lethal threat to HRH if he didn't take the stuff ASAP. (Yeah, Sirius too, but of course that wouldn't be an issue for Snape.) << The question that should be asked is this: Why was *Remus*, who has LIVED with lycanthropy since his childhood, so careless as to lose track of the time of month and forget to take the potion when he *knows* it's so gravely critical to the safety of those around him? As for Snape's handling of the situation, it seems he was reacting as quickly as possible because time was of the essence (also, someone else already mentioned that the potion might have been inactive and therefore useless at that point.). Snape speculated from the start that Remus had been aiding Sirius, and when he sees the map and witnesses Remus (or the dot that represents him) running down the secret passage, that convinces him that his suspicions were correct and that Sirius had been using that passage to bypass the Dementors (and Remus knew it and said nothing about it). I think he wanted to catch Remus and Sirius both red-handed and off- guard, and to do so required prompt action. When Snape finds the Invisibility Cloak at the base of the Whomping Willow, the situation becomes even more grave as he realizes at least one innocent life is in imminent danger. >>Severus had no way of knowing whether Remus had already transformed or not. If he hadn't, he might at any moment, and really needed that potion. And if Snape were at all concerned about HRH, he would have tried to prevent their coming to harm. If, on the other hand, Remus had already transformed, what did he think he could do against a werewolf and a murderer? Why didn't he get some backup?<< Snape seemed to be holding his own rather well until the trio knocked him out. He's well aware of what Remus is and because of that, on top of his suspicions that Remus has been aiding Sirius, Snape has been keeping tabs on Remus as well as the moon-cycle (which is why Snape checks to see if Remus has taken his potion each month). The fact that Snape binds *Remus*, and not Sirius, shows who Snape feels to be the greater threat and he acts accordingly. As for Snape not getting backup; again, I think it was a matter of time being of the essence. The fact that JKR mentions Snape being slightly out-of-breath when he pulls-off the cloak suggests that he ran the whole way to the Shrieking Shack. Also, I have to give the man and his abilities a little more credit. He's been a successful spy against Voldie, is a Master of Potions, is a "superb" Occlumens according to Remus himself, and he seems to more than hold his own with a wand. He's known Remus and Sirius since his school days and probably has a reasonable grasp on their abilities; and after his first near- encounter with Remus in werewolf form, I'm sure he's more than familiarized himself with the subject of lycanthropy and knows more than a few countermeasures that are effective against werewolfs. Snape's no pushover. >>I can only infer that Snape was so eager to nail Sirius and Remus that he didn't really care if HRH were killed in the process.<< I wouldn't infer that at all. Yes, Snape clearly wanted (for legitimate reasons, even if misguided) to nail Sirius and Remus...but to infer that he didn't care about the safety of HRH is quite a stretch of speculation. I don't believe he even realized any students were in imminent danger until he found Harry's cloak at the base of the Willow. >>Doesn't say much for our boy Sevvie, does it? And then he has the nerve to paint himself as HRH's selfless rescuer. Nice, Snape, really nice.<< I think Snape running down that passage knowing he was likely to encounter two full-blown, powerful wizards - one a werewolf and the other a convicted murderer - was extremely brave. It's also telling that while Snape had *two* opportunities to finish- off Sirius himself (the first when Sirius charged at him, the second when he awoke after the Dementors were driven away), he chose to do the right thing and turn Sirius over to proper authorities (he even bothered to put Sirius on a stretcher, which was much nicer than the way Sirius transported the unconscious Snape [i.e. letting Snape's head bump and scrape against the passage ceiling]). So Snape showed a lot of retraint considering his history with, and volatile emotions toward, Sirius. Don't lose sight of the fact that Snape, along with the rest of the Wizarding world, has legitimate reasons to believe Sirius is a murderer and the one who betrayed the Potters (and this is on top of the very legitimate *personal* reason he doesn't trust Sirius); likewise, Snape has good reasons not to trust Remus and to believe that Remus is in cahoots with Sirius. Snape really thought he was doing a brave and noble thing in confronting Sirius and Remus, and he hoped that his turning-in Sirius would finally earn him some recognition and respect (something I think is long overdue for him). Instead, he ended up empty-handed and swallowing his pride in humiliation. So one must pardon me for feeling Snape deserves more than a little slack here. BM From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Nov 24 11:44:15 2003 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:44:15 -0000 Subject: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85768 entropymail wrote: > But why was Snape so dead-set against Black being freed? It was so > important to Snape that he get Black back to the dementors for the > kiss that he was willing to forego any explanation from anyone -- > didn't even want to entertain the possibility that he might have > gotten the story wrong. Seems that Snape was acting purely > emotionally, rather than logically. HunterGreen: I think you answered your own question there. He *was* behaving in a purely emotional way. Think about Snape's state that night, first he realizes that Lupin hasn't taken his potion yet (which I imagine Snape is VERY annoyed about, since he is AGAINST Lupin working there at all, and is being kind enough to make the damn potion for him every month, and Lupin can't remember to come and get it on time). Then he sees Lupin GONE, and looks down to see the map on the desk and Lupin disappearing off the edge (toward the path he knows leads to Hogsmeade). He has been sure all year that Lupin was helping Sirius, and now he sees Lupin doing something very odd: disappearing through a 'secret' passage on the night he's supposed to be turning into a werewolf. I think he thought his moment had come, that he was going to FINALLY be proved right and when he got there, there was no way in hell he was going to let that moment be stolen from him. >Perhaps revenge? But Snapes's reckless actions to have >Sirius "kissed" seem to go beyond a childhood grudge over a reckless >prank. That's right, they do. He thinks that Sirius has been sneaking into the castle right under everyone's nose. He thinks that Sirius is a murderer and DESERVES to be kissed. The fact is he *HATES* Sirius and has spent a large part of his life letting this hate fester and not exactly 'making his peace' with it in any way. For once HE has the control, not Sirius and James. Also, I think he was being opportunistic as well. He obviously wanted the nobility (order of merlin anyone?) that came along with catching Sirius...which may be why he didn't kill him himself when he had the chance--he wanted to make a show of it. Also, I agree with Eloise when she said that "I suspect that it has to do with a deep seated need to prove himself." Which makes complete sense. Not only does he have the baggage of the childhood encounters with Sirius and James, but the fact that he was, indeed, a DE, and briefly had the chance of facing time (or a life sentence....or even a death sentence for that matter) for such. Whether conciously or not, he wanted to be the 'hero' in this situation. > Which leads me to (sorry, folks) the "Snape loves Lily" theory. This > seems to be a logical reason (makes sense to me) for Snape's blind > fury at Sirius. If Snape has believed all along that Sirius was the > Potter's secret keeper, then he has been blaming Sirius and stewing > over the loss of the love of his life, Lily, for twelve long years. > Or, being a Voldie insider, he may even have been privy to the fact > that Pettigrew was a spy, funneling information to the Death Eaters > whenever he could. So even if he knew after the fact that Peter had > been the Potter's true secret keeper, he may have still blamed >Sirius for being so stupid as to pass on this sacred trust to >someone who was so obviously untrustworthy. That's an interesting thought...although I must admit I am VERY against the whole 'Snape-loves-Lily' theory (I just can't see it). I have wondered if he DID know the whole time that Sirius was innocent (from his DE connections), but that makes him REALLY cold-blooded, I can't see his Sirius hatred being THAT strong. By the way, Bluesqueak posted a theory on the whole Sirius/Snape/Shrieking Shack incident that you might be interested in reading, its messege # 39662. -HunterGreen From eloiseherisson at aol.com Mon Nov 24 11:57:37 2003 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 06:57:37 EST Subject: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives?) Message-ID: <134.2852ba96.2cf34c31@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85769 Entropy: >But why was Snape so dead-set against Black being freed? It was so >important to Snape that he get Black back to the dementors for the >kiss that he was willing to forego any explanation from anyone -- >didn't even want to entertain the possibility that he might have >gotten the story wrong. Eloise: I believe that Snape blames himself for failing to protect the Potters and that his fury at Sirius is in part a projection of this. We know that Dumbledore had a spy in Vodemort's camp who warned that the Potters were in danger. At the moment the logical assumption is that this was Snape. So he did the first part of the job, but in his view he fell down in not, as he thought, recognising that the weak link in the chain was Sirius. Having l et Sirius fall through the net once, he wasn't going to make the same mistake again. Sirius, he thought, tricked him, made a fool out of him, made him fail. Those are not things you do to Snape if you know what's good for you. Entropy: >Seems that Snape was acting purely >emotionally, rather than logically. Perhaps revenge? But Snapes's >reckless actions to have Sirius "kissed" seem to go beyond a childhood >grudge over a reckless prank. Eloise: Precisely. It goes much deeper than that and is, I believe, linked to the anger he displays towards James' memory, too. After all, Snape seems to have tried to have protect James and Lily (despite his animosity to James) but even so James, by his own (as Snape would see it) pig-headed insistance on choosing his own Secret Keeper instead of allowing Dumbledore to do the job, managed to get the pair of them killed. *He* made Snape fail, too. Of course, Snape is right to an extent: it *was* James' choice of Secret Keeper that led to his and Lily's deaths, albeit that Snape didn't know the true identity of the Secret Keeper. Snape has logic alright, even if it is informed by personal animosity. He doesn't *want* to "look at the rat"; he doesn't need to complicate things. He's already coping with the discomfort of knowing that he's fouled up once; he really doesn't want to contemplate the fact that he might have been wrong about something else. I am sure that all this has far more to do with his own psyche and feelings of self worth (or the lack thereof) than with anything else. He *needs* to be right. He *needs* to be in control of situations. I might have mentioned this in my last post, but I think this is also at the root of why he goes it alone instead of summoning Dumbledore's help when he goes to the Shrieking Shack. To him, it's his own unfinished business. Something he has to do alone, to prove himself. The fact that he gets sweet revenge on a personal enemy is the icing on the cake. This leads me onto something else. Well, it's the root of all this really, because it's where my thinking about Snape all started. I believe that one of the keys to Snape's personality is this deep seated need to prove himself. To me this explains much about his relationship with Harry. Put simply, he is jealous of Harry. Snape's life has not been an easy one. He chose the wrong path, risked all to correct that, put his life on the line in the attempt to defeat Voldemort and yet so far we haven't seen him achieve anything very much. He doesn't save Harry's parents and fails to protect Harry himself, yet infant Harry with no effort at all somehow, temporarily at least, defeats the Dark Lord. He craves recognition (does anyone doubt how much he would have liked that Order of Merlin?) yet every heroic deed he has done has had to be done in secret. Harry on the other hand has a celebrity of which he, as a schoolmaster locked away in his dungeon, can only dream. Why else should he make so much play of Harry's "celebrity", his "fame"? Harry has done nothing to warrant Snape's aspersions;this is purely to do with what is going on inside Snape's own head. He's projecting his own need for recognition onto Harry. He attempts to protect the Philosopher's Stone from Quirrel and Voldemort, but in the end it is *Harry* who does it. Poor Severus. The pattern just carries on. By the end of PoA, he thinks he has managed to right part of the situation. He's captured Sirius. For whatever reason he hasn't exacted an immediate personal revenge, but is awaiting an official, Ministry sanctioned execution, he's being the model wizarding citizen about to be officially recognised for his role...and the dratted Potter kid thwarts him again. Worse than that, he does it with Dumbledore's collusion and Snape has to recognise that he was wrong in his interpretation of events. No wonder he's angry. Entropy: >Which leads me to (sorry, folks) the "Snape loves Lily" theory. This >seems to be a logical reason (makes sense to me) for Snape's blind >fury at Sirius. If Snape has believed all along that Sirius was the >Potter's secret keeper, then he has been blaming Sirius and stewing >over the loss of the love of his life, Lily, for twelve long years. Eloise: This may also be so. I've held out against L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S for a long time now, but I have to confess that OoP does seem to indicate that it might be true. But I think I've demonstrated that even so he may have other reasons for his feelings towards Sirius. Entropy: >Or, being a Voldie insider, he may even have been privy to the fact >that Pettigrew was a spy, funneling information to the Death Eaters >whenever he could. So even if he knew after the fact that Peter had >been the Potter's true secret keeper, he may have still blamed Sirius >for being so stupid as to pass on this sacred trust to someone who was >so obviously untrustworthy. Eloise: If this is the case, then his failure to alert Dumbledore to the identity of the mole in his organisation is unforgivable. I don't believe that he knew Pettigrew was a Death Eater until after the infirmary scene in PoA (when I *hope* that Dumbledore sat him down and gently explained a lot of stuff to him). We are told more than once that Snape has an uncanny knack of putting two and two together. A lot of the time he's right. Sometimes he's very wrong. But he has such conviction that he's right that he's not likely to look readily at alternative explanations, especially from sources he has reason to suspect such as Sirius or Lupin. After OoP, however, I am left wondering a few things. If Snape and Dumbledore are such experts at occulomency, I wonder how between them they were not able to divine who was the spy in the Order of the Phoenix. OK, I let Snape off this one, as I assume he was working deep under cover and the members of the OoP didn't know about him. But Dumbledore? But how come Snape didn't suss Crouch!Moody? Was he really so intimidated by Moody's apparent suspicion of him that he was unable to divine his true nature? ~Eloise [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 24 12:35:33 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 12:35:33 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's animus toward the Potters/the prophecy (was Replay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85770 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > I find this idea very disturbing. Yes, Harry needs time, but not to > learn to become a murderer. Not to become Tom Riddle III. Not to yield > the high moral ground that separates him from Tom Riddle, not to learn > to hate when what (presumably) makes him superior to Voldemort is his > capacity for love. > Other wizards, Snape for example, could hit Voldemort with an Avada > Kedavra, but that clearly isn't going to work. Harry has to be able to > do something only he has the ability to do, something related to the > spiritual kinship between him and Voldemort that is reflected in their > wands. Somehow he must figure out a way to make Voldemort destroy himself. > Kneasy: Sorry, Carol. Can't agree. Obviously we are talking about a fictional character here, so your wistful wishes are a distinct possibility; but I hope not. I for one would be depressed if Harry spends 6.9 books as a moving target, subject to innumerable dangers, trauma (emotional and physical) honing his wizarding skills and never reaching the cathartic "Yes!" as Voldy finally bites the dust at his hand. I want Harry to be a proper hero. It seems to me that a scan of the history books shows that those who take the moral high ground are either those fastidiously reluctant about getting their hands dirty in a life or death crisis or inhabit that strange world whose mantra seems to be 'force never solved anything' when it patently has and does. They then use perfect hindsight to castigate those who do what is necessary and/or inevitable, claiming in their rectitude that having their necks saved by courage and fortitude is somehow distasteful. There is little moral difference between tricking someone into self- destruction and openly seeking their elimination by direct means. In fact, the latter option is the path to heroism, an attachment to the former an indication of weakness of will, strength or logic. Carol's arguments would make St George as bad as the dragon, Beowulf as reprehensible as Grendel and Arthur as evil as Mordred. Not so. "Men die, cattle die, only the glory of heroes lives forever." or, "Better to have lived one day as a tiger than a thousand years as a sheep." Carol: > What no one seems to have noticed about the prophecy is the line, > "Neither can live while the other survives." The meaning in that line > is clear enough when it comes to Voldemort: He isn't really living and > hasn't been since he was vaporized. Kneasy: Well, I for one have previously offered an alternative reading; not guaranteed, of course, but there again which interpretation is? I think there's a possibility that the 'neither' you quote could refer to James and Lily, the 'other' being Harry. (They are referred to obliquely at the beginning of the Prophesy - 'born to those'; why not again?) This would explain why DD didn't wrap them in impenetrable security; their deaths were *required* for the prophecy to be fulfilled and for Voldys!Bane to be formed and be recognised. To depress you even more, I don't think Harry will survive. Ex-heroes tend to become an embarassment fairly quickly. While they're around politicians can't claim the credit. From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Mon Nov 24 11:42:45 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:42:45 +0000 Subject: [Fwd: Bellatrix Lestrange Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: I love tragic endings]] Message-ID: <3FC1EEB5.7020806@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85771 Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: >>Maybe I'm reading too much into things, but I get the feeling Bellatrix loves Voldy. Could it be a reciprocal thing--if not now, then possibly in the future if Voldy were to win?>> Carol wrote: >Bellatrix, though she's some twenty-five years younger than Voldemort, may be in love with him, or at least fascinated by him, in some weird way, but she can never have seen him in his (handsome) human form. He left at about age eighteen (before she was born) to seek out dark wizards, and when he came back had transformed himself so frequently that he was barely recognizable. (Presumably any resemblance to Tom Riddle is now completely gone.) Her husband and brother-in-law also joined Voldemort, so whatever the attraction was (revenge for the pure bloods?), they shared it with her. Presumably it wasn't physical attraction in their case, at least. To return to Bellatrix, she seems to regard Voldemort as some sort of mentor or teacher who taught her much of what she knows of the Dark Arts. I could cite some passages from OoP to back this up if anyone wants them. Maybe Voldemort is her Dumbledore, and her fierce loyalty to LV parallels Harry's to DD?> Angel writes: I would have thought that the parallel of the relationship between Bella and Voldemort was more Snape/Dumbledore. Snape seems to have had a miserable childhood, that progressed natually into the DEs. Bella, OTOH, Bella seems to have had a good childhood, spoilt brattish, but not learning what she wanted, not getting what she really needed, and LV rescued her and got her into his coterie. From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Mon Nov 24 11:49:15 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 11:49:15 +0000 Subject: About a messy post, . . . In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FC1F03B.1060604@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85772 Iris wrote: > > 1) Thanks to Harry, Good and Evil will come to a kind of status quo > > (neither Harry nor Voldemort can defeat the other without dying, and > > we already saw how they happened to neutralize each other because of > > their brother wands). Carol wrote: > The Prophecy does *not* > say that neither Harry nor Voldemort can defeat the other without > dying, which virtually guarantees an unhappy ending with the hero dead > along with the villain. JKR would never reveal her plans so overtly > and I for one would stop reading: Okay, Harry has to die in order to > destroy Voldemort. Why bother to read more? > > What the Prophecy actually says is "either must die at the hand of the > other for neither can live while the other survives" (OoP Am. ed. 841). > > In other words, one will have to die at the hand of the other, not > both will kill the other. And if one survives, he will be able to > *live*--as he has evidently not yet done. > > I said something like this in a longer post about how Harry might > cause Voldemort to die without becoming a murderer himself, but it > seems to fit well here as well. Angel adds: I'm tending towards a 'Dark is Rising' type ending, where Harry slips off to another place. What are the possible endings for HP? He dies - LV also He dies - LV wins He lives - leaves the WW He lives - lives miserably in the WW He lives happily ever after. [Angel considers: He lives HEA with Ginny, and they have lots of kids that look like James and Lily - Ginny has eyes like James, doesn't she?] From dfrankiswork at netscape.net Mon Nov 24 13:18:46 2003 From: dfrankiswork at netscape.net (davewitley) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 13:18:46 -0000 Subject: Legilimens and Occlumens (was Snape's Fury) In-Reply-To: <134.2852ba96.2cf34c31@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85773 Eloise wrote: > After OoP, however, I am left wondering a few things. > If Snape and Dumbledore are such experts at occulomency, I wonder how between > them they were not able to divine who was the spy in the Order of the > Phoenix. OK, I let Snape off this one, as I assume he was working deep under cover > and the members of the OoP didn't know about him. But Dumbledore? > > But how come Snape didn't suss Crouch!Moody? Was he really so intimidated by > Moody's apparent suspicion of him that he was unable to divine his true > nature? Interesting questions, which point up how little we know of the Legilimens and Occlumens spells, since Snape never got very far in his lessons with Harry. We only have a general idea of what Legilimens can accomplish, for a start, when not resisted by its object. For example, the memories shown seem to be random, perhaps biased slightly in favour of unpleasant memories. Scenes from Pettigrew's childhood would not tell Snape or Dumbledore a great deal. They would have to light on scenes directly involving the Death Eaters. Legilimency does appear to confer an ability to tell if someone is lying, though how this works isn't clear. We know Occlumency can counter this, since Voldemort apparently didn't rumble Snape. The next question is whether the use of Occlumency can be detected by the Legilimens. In the hands of the novice Occlumens, yes, clearly, because we know Snape could tell when Harry was blocking. However, we know that Snape could spy on Voldemort undetected, which implies that his Occlumency was so advanced that, not only could he prevent Voldemort perceiving the truth, but presumably also provide a stream of suitable memories to make Voldemort think his Legilimency was succeeding. Whether this was done by controlling the flow of true memories to build up a partial picture, or providing false ones as well, we don't know. In the case of Crouch, disguised as Moody, all that would be necessary would be to block all attempts at Legilimency, as that could be explained by Moody's notorious suspicion. It would, IMO, seem entirely natural to Snape and Dumbledore that Moody would refuse to let anyone inside his mind. We also don't know the extent to which successful Occlumency opens up the mind of the Legilimens. Harry managed it with Snape, but that was using the Protego spell, which clearly gives the game away. would there have been a risk, supposing Snape tried to read Moody's mind, or Dumbledore Pettigrew's, of the tables being turned and sensitive information flowing the other way? Then there is the final issue: under what conditions would Dumbledore and Snape (and the wizarding world generally) consider the use of Legilimency acceptable? In training, clearly, but then Dumbledore AFAWK sanctioned the use of Ungorgivable curses for this. But against a supposed ally? One might suppose that, at the time of recruitment it would be done. But afterwards? Suppose Pettigrew genuinely joined the order and was only later 'turned' by Voldemort - what degree of suspicion would order members feel justified this form of invasion of privacy? Again, we just don't know. David From patientx3 at aol.com Mon Nov 24 14:09:44 2003 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 14:09:44 -0000 Subject: Animagi vs Patronus / Siblings (was: Lupin/Boar/Madam/Spy!Narcissa/Animagi....) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85774 > Iggy McSnurd wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85544 : << It's not your Animagus form that you don't actively chose, but the form of your Patronus that comes from something inside you and isn't chosen by the caster. (In some cases, it is probably chosen as an animal that you have a particular affinity for.) >> Catlady Replied: >>I would like to know the relationship between Animagus form Patronus form. JKR has said that she would like to be an Otter if she were an Animagus, and she gave her avatar character (Hermione) an Otter for Patronus.<< I think the idea is that the animagus form is an expression of the subject's personality, and the patronus form is an expression of something familiar or comforting. This is how Lupin explains them: (chpt 12, PoA) "The Patronus is a kind of positive force, a projection of the very things that the dementor feeds upon -- hope, happiness, the desire to survive -- but it cannot feel despair, as real humans can, so the dementors can't hurt it." Then later he says: "[it] will work only if you are concentrating, with all your might, on a single, very happy memory." I wonder how much interference the memory has on the patronus. When Harry casts his firm non-formless one, he's not thinking about any particular thought, BUT he was thinking about his father JUST before that (what I find fascinating is that the patronus took the form of a stag BEFORE he knew what animal 'prongs' was). Hermione's takes the form of an otter...why? Maybe because the otter is (generally at least) a happy, playful sort of animal. Cho's takes the form of a swan, maybe reflecting how much she values beauty, how something beautiful (but not altogether deep) could be one of her most happy memories. So, perhaps one of Hermione's best memories involves a sort of triumphant/playful moment (which doesn't quite fit with her character, unless she's thinking of the "you solved it" moment). AS for the animagus form, now that's a little more complicated since we don't know anything about that process except that its very complicated. It is very different than a patronus form, however, because a patronus reflects something that a witch/wizard finds comforting or warm, and a animagus form reflects the witch/wizard themself. James is a stag, which could be in relation to his strong, brave and somewhat arrogant nature. Sirius is a dog, which must be because of his loyalty and bravery, perhaps some sort of territoriality that he has (we see something along those lines when it comes to the argument between him and Molly), and it could also mean that he's more of a follower than a leader (the pensieve scene sort of showed this either way, he both was the one 'bored', thus suggesting the whole scene, but James was the aggressor, he was mostly following James' lead). The reason for Peter being a rat is rather obvious (although you think that this would have come up when James and Sirius decided to make him the secret-keeper). McGonagall being a cat is rather interesting...I suppose cats are very clean, very independent and can be very stubborn (I tend to think that if Hermione became an animagis she would be a cat too, and that Ron would also be a dog, I have no idea about Harry though). Another thing about about animagis is that they seem to resemble the person some way or another. McGonagall as a cat has certain markings around her face that resemble her glasses, and Peter's appearence is describe close to Scabbers: "His skin looked grubby, almost like Scabbers's fur, and something of the rat lingered around his pointed nose and his very small, watery eyes." (another example is how Sirius starts to look snuffles-like when he lets himself go). IMO, the animal chosen reflects the personality and the 'look' of the animal reflects the person's appearence. (this is further complicated by the different breeds of dogs or cats, for example, obviously Sirius is more like the bearlike dog that a poodle). [To digress, the animagis patronus similarity/difference reminds me of boggarts versis dementers. It always bothered me that Lupin interprets what Harry fears most as 'fear' when he's afraid of dementers if he was most afraid of fear, the boggart would appear as a boggart (which it couldn't since no one knows what a boggart looks like on its own). A dementer is not exactly fear, but despair or misery, which is something to be afraid of, but not fear in it of itself.] Catlady continued: >>I also want to know, what happens if a person who has become an Animagus goes over the whole training again, from scratch, will heesh get another animal form?<< That's a good question. Maybe they would get a different form if they did the re-training at an older age. Of course, that makes me wonder if the animagis form is the wizard as a whole (down to their very core) or of their current personality (I guess that's similar to the arguments about what the sorting hat does). IMHO the training can only be done once, that you only get one animagi form. >>Can a person who is a werewolf become an Animagus? with an animal form other than wolf? Can a werewolf who is an Animagus with an animal form other than wolf avoid turning into a wolf monster at Full Moon by turning into hiser animal before the moment?<< I would hope not, because then Lupin has been ignoring an easy solution for a LONG time. I would guess that MWPP looked into that when the rest of them became animagi, but maybe they assumed it couldn't be done. Canis Majorette wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85588 : << I again pose the question of what it may mean that the Black brothers are named for powerful and revered stars, each with their own well developed star lore. What may be implied by each name, and the consequent relationship? >> Catlady: >>It means that the Black family had (by then) a tradition of astronomical given names, and that Sirius's and Regulus's parents had Big Egos and intended their sons to be grow up to be superstar politicians or CEOs or such.<< [snip] Catherine McK wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85630 : << In fact, are there _any_ mixed-sex sibling groups other than the Weasleys? >> Catlady: >>Yes, the older Boneses: Amelia Bones, her brother Edgar Bones who was killed by Voldemort, and Susan Bones's eponymous parent (presumably father).<< Relating to this talk of siblings...is anyone else bothered by how non-close siblings are in the potterverse? Other than Dennis and Colin Creevy (and fred and george, who don't count because their twins), siblings seem to be annoyed by each other and generally ignore each other. I know this is the case in a lot of families, but I find it sort of sad that so many of the sibling relationships in the series are rather dysfunctional (we have Lily/Petunia, Sirius/Regulus, and I'm sure Narcissa and Bellatrix don't get along so well with their muggle-marrying sister). I'm thinking also of Ron and Ginny. He cares about her, that much is clear, but other than that he seems to want nothing to do with her. Both of them are the youngest of a large family, and Ron is closer in age to Ginny than he is to Fred and George (who are again, twins and often exclude him), but they don't seem to have a relationship beyond the 'annoying-kid-sister' role. Personally, I've known a lot of strong brother-sister relationships in RL (including my own with my older brother), and it annoys me to see that possibility ignored (as though opposite-gender siblings can't possibly understand each other). Perhaps, though, this is due to Harry's POV, they could be very close when he doesn't have a friend around, although I doubt it. -HunterGreen From erinellii at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 14:25:21 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 14:25:21 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's animus toward the Potters/the prophecy (was Replay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85775 > Kathy: > "Merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit.." Does > anyone believe Dumbledore couldn't have killed Tom if he wanted >to? Erin: Actually, yes. I believe that had Dumbledore attempted to AK Voldemort, he would have failed through some circumstance he could not have forseen. Much as Voldemort failed when attempting to kill Harry as a baby. I'm not saying that Voldemort's mother's love would have saved him, of course. But something would have happened to prevent Dumbledore, and it might have been every bit as disastrous for DD as the failed AK was for Voldy. Why? Because of the prophecy. It foretold that the Dark Lord would mark Harry, and so that was what happened. It fortells that only Harry (or, all right, possibly Neville) can kill LV, and I believe it. And so, I think, does Dumbledore. Do you seriously believe that if he could have killed LV right then, he wouldn't have? Sure, he tells LV it's because it wouldn't satisfy him... but I think that pure relief would outweigh that unsatisfied feeling. He's not capable, and he knows it. The reason for the remark is that he doesn't want LV to know it. Erin From belijako at online.no Mon Nov 24 15:01:46 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 15:01:46 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's animus toward the Potters/the prophecy (was Replay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85776 Kneasy wrote: > I want Harry to be a proper hero. > > It seems to me that a scan of the history books shows that those who take > the moral high ground are either those fastidiously reluctant about getting > their hands dirty in a life or death crisis or inhabit that strange world whose > mantra seems to be 'force never solved anything' when it patently has and > does. They then use perfect hindsight to castigate those who do what is > necessary and/or inevitable, claiming in their rectitude that having their > necks saved by courage and fortitude is somehow distasteful. > There is little moral difference between tricking someone into self- > destruction and openly seeking their elimination by direct means. In fact, > the latter option is the path to heroism, an attachment to the former an > indication of weakness of will, strength or logic. Me: And I have to disagree with you Kneazy (and agree qith Carol). You seem to believe that only a character that gets violent is a proper hero... I guess that means you don't consider real life characters like Gandhi and Mandela proper heroes... Or maybe you've seen too many action movies :-)) -Where the difference between the hero and the villain seems to be just one thing: The bad guy is the one who kicks first. The good guy is the one who kicks back. And they both live by the rule "an eye for an eye", retaliates and repays evil with the same amount of violence, ending with the "good" guy beating the bad guy to a bloody pulp at the end of the movie. And serves him right of course :-). But what does that DO to the presumably "good guy"? How can someone stay intrinsically "good" when the actions he's forced to perform are in essence "evil"? What's so heroic about avenging evil actions with the same evil medicine? How does it make him different other than the fact that he was not the first to maime or kick or kill? In my opinion; what makes a good guy different from a bad guy is that he chooses not to use the same evil means to reach his goal. He has a different "work ethics" so to speak. If he didn't, there wouldn't be any bad guys and good guys, just equally bad guys destroying each other over disagreements. And I believe Rowling hints at this in her books. It's subtle, but easy to see. Remember; Dumbledore (and Hermione) are often Rowling's "voice" in the books. I don't have direct quotes, but his viewpoint is always that it's wrong to act like the evil side would act. Example: Dumbledore does not approve of Dementors as allies. NcGonagall has said about him that there's lot of things he has the power to do, but he doesn't. Because it would not be right. Dumbledore has integrity. He has a high moral standard. And I think it's significant that Harry's strength (according to DD) is love in some form rather than Avada Kedavra skills... So I totally agree with Carol; I don't think Harry will defeat Voldemort by "becoming like him". I don't know how he will do it, but I'm sure there'll be a way that's acceptable to Dumbledore's (and therefore Rowling's) ethics and high standards of conduct :-)) I think there is a significant moral difference between, in your words, "tricking someone into self-destruction and seeking their elimination by direct means". After all, having Voldemort being destroyed by his own actions is self-inflicted and something he brings upon himself and thus Harry would not be (directly) responsible for his death. Of course, either way the end result is a dead Voldemort. BUT, the most important thing is that in the process, Harry has not been forced to "become" evil to fight evil. Inflicting damage and death on others will do something to the person doing it whether he wants it or not, whether the intention is "noble" or not. It's no good. Berit From gbannister10 at aol.com Mon Nov 24 14:45:06 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 14:45:06 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess). In-Reply-To: <1069583971.17270.4.camel@Bujold_RH> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85777 > > > Ron can't be a better chess player or logician that Rowling is. Maybe > > he can be now, but while Rowling was writing the first book she may > > not have had the easy access to chess masters she presumably does now. > > Angel: > I know this has been discussed before, but I'll try to settle a question > about wizarding chess. I am a reasonably good chess player myself so I tried to figure out what the game between Ron and McGonagall's chess set looked like. After thinking about it for a while, I am 99,9% sure that : > > _either Ron or the chess set is an extremely bad player, > > Geoff: Speaking as someone who was sufficiently good many years ago to hold down a board position in my College team, I find it difficult to see how someone can reconstruct the game in PS from the sketchy evidence provided. Only on about six occasions does the narrative refer to a specific move and, often, the move is vaguely described. Then we have comments that Ron darted round the board fending off white's attacks or that several pieces were taken. I don't think even my logic could put together the game. Can anybody pull together the clues better than I can and justify the critical comments made about Ron's game of rebut them? Geoff From stevejjen at earthlink.net Mon Nov 24 15:47:27 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 15:47:27 -0000 Subject: Why Does Peter Wait to Tell Voldemort about Animagi? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85778 I find it fascinating that Pettigrew did not tell LV about the illegal animagi until he returns to him in GOF. Sirius says in OOTP, "Voldemort will know all about me being an animagus by now, Wormtail will have told him, so my big disguise is useless." (chap. 5, p. 82). Why did Peter wait? In a thought from post 85773, David wonders if Peter was ever a true member of the Order. It does seem Pettigrew genuinely joined the Order for at least a short time because Sirius says in POA: "You'd been passing information to him for a year before Lily and James died!" and Peter responds: "He--he was taking over everywhere...Wh-- what was there to be gained by refusing him?" (US, chap. 19, p. 374). We don't know exactly when the Order was formed, but Voldemort was rising throughout the 70's, with MWPP and Lily graduating in 1978. That would give them 3 years to be in the Order prior to the fateful Halloween night. So it's only presumption, but I don't think Peter was a spy the whole time, rather he turned when LV started taking over everywhere, and the Order was being "picked off one by one" as Lupin tells us in OOTP. But this bit about not telling LV about the animagi, that has me questioning Peter's motives in betraying the Potters to LV. If he were indeed a loyal Spy, with true allegiance to Voldemort, he would pass on everything he knows to him. I'm wondering now if he wasn't reserving this information as his own last "loophole" and indeed he was able to transform and live as Wormtail for many years until he's 'outed' in the Shrieking Shack. Then his choice is between joining LV and going to Azkaban, and he chooses LV again. Pettigrew seems to crave becoming part of the "inner circle" whether it's with the Marauders or LV. Perhaps he thought by helping LV back to life, telling him about the illegal animagi, that he would be elevated in LV's circle of DE's. But LV continues to be contemptuous of him, and Pettigrew is conspicuously absent in OOTP. To me, Pettigrew is the true wildcard. His motives are so shifty and he seems to have true allegiance to no one but himself. And the life- debt with Harry adds another level of ambiguity to this already shadowy character. What is he going to do next?! I wouldn't be surprised to find out Wormtail has disappeared from Voldemort's service and will turn up at a crucial moment in the coming War. Jen Reese From foxmoth at qnet.com Mon Nov 24 17:09:55 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:09:55 -0000 Subject: Third Man in the Graveyard? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85779 The text of OOP doesn't really tell us who killed Sirius. It occurs to me that we don't know who killed Cedric either. Harry is on the ground with his hands over his eyes when Cedric dies in GoF. It was Voldemort's wand, certainly, but all we know about the speaker of the curse is, *** A swishing noise and a second voice, which screeched the words to the night: 'Avada Kedavra!' *** When Harry opens his eyes again, Wormtail has put down his bundle and drawn out a wand. This wand, which Peter uses to bind Harry and light the fire at the base of the cauldron, is apparently not the wand which killed Cedric, since there is no echo of these spells during the priori incantatem scene. So maybe, just maybe, there is another Death Eater present, out of Harry's field of view, which JKR tells us several times is very limited. Pippin who has no evidence to prove that ESE!Lupin was the twentieth hijacker or the second gunman. From sylviablundell at aol.com Mon Nov 24 17:51:08 2003 From: sylviablundell at aol.com (sylviablundell2001) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:51:08 -0000 Subject: Neville's broken nose Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85780 Neville's broken nose had the effect of making him mis-pronounce his words, the spell coming out as "Stubefy!" It was thus ineffective. If a wizard had a natural speech defect, a lisp, for example, or an inability to pronounce the letter "r", would this also affect his ability to cast spells? Would he have to undergo elocution lessons? Or could it be put right by a simple spell? Sylvia (just curious) From two_flower2 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 18:13:50 2003 From: two_flower2 at yahoo.com (two_flower2) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 18:13:50 -0000 Subject: Traitor yet again (Was: Third Man in the Graveyard?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85781 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > The text of OOP doesn't really tell us who killed Sirius. It occurs > to me that we don't know who killed Cedric either. > > A swishing noise and a second voice, which screeched the > words to the night: 'Avada Kedavra!' > *** > > So maybe, just maybe, there is another Death Eater present, out > of Harry's field of view, which JKR tells us several times is very > limited. > > Pippin Twoflower2: *nods* And this Death Eater would be the ESE Traitor of yet unknown identity. Pippin, referring to some of your earler posts, I completely agree with you that the series is going to have a big time traitor, and it is going to be one of the earlier war participants, who was introduced to the reader early in the series as a good guy. This would be the one whom Voldie really meant as "his most faithful servant in Hogwarts", and who, no doubt, was popping up throughout the whole story in the episodes like one you have just analyzed in "Third man" post. As a faithful lurker of this list, I know all about ESE Lupin and have to admit it's a very likely possibility. Though I'd rather have him as a goodie :) The other suspects would be such people as McGonagall (Elkins' subject), Snape or even Hagrid. Or maybe it could be somebody who was always there, but on the sidelines, away from readers' scrutiny? Like Flitwick or Pomfrey? The other thing I could propose (no doubt, somebody have already done it) is a student who is not really a student. If magic can give a grown-up man a babyhead and turn a toad into tadpole, may be there is a way to revert a grown-up human to his or her child version. Two2 From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Mon Nov 24 18:29:16 2003 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 07:29:16 +1300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Traitor yet again (Was: Third Man in the Graveyard?) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20031125072308.02d063f0@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 85782 At 18:13 24/11/2003 +0000, you wrote: >Twoflower2: *nods* > >And this Death Eater would be the ESE Traitor of yet unknown identity. > >Pippin, referring to some of your earler posts, I completely agree >with you that the series is going to have a big time traitor, and it >is going to be one of the earlier war participants, who was >introduced to the reader early in the series as a good guy. This >would be the one whom Voldie really meant as "his most faithful >servant in Hogwarts", and who, no doubt, was popping up throughout >the whole story in the episodes like one you have just analyzed >in "Third man" post. > >As a faithful lurker of this list, I know all about ESE Lupin and >have to admit it's a very likely possibility. Though I'd rather have >him as a goodie :) The other suspects would be such people as >McGonagall (Elkins' subject), Snape or even Hagrid. Or maybe it could >be somebody who was always there, but on the sidelines, away from >readers' scrutiny? Like Flitwick or Pomfrey? > >The other thing I could propose (no doubt, somebody have already done >it) is a student who is not really a student. If magic can give a >grown-up man a babyhead and turn a toad into tadpole, may be there is >a way to revert a grown-up human to his or her child version. > >Two2 Tanya wrote This is an interesting idea. I will have to do some thinking. However, I cannot see how it can be Snape. In the first book, Quirrell used him as a useful smoke screen, which helped as Snape didn't tell anyone either. The other issue with this, is Snape has such a abrasive personality, and a good traitor will be one that everyone likes, and the shock factor at the eventual unveiling. Put it this way, at the stage in the story now, Harry would be more than happy to find out Snape is a traitor. But I feel that the identity of the real traitor will be a very unpleasant shock to him. Tanya From lynch at agere.com Mon Nov 24 17:22:36 2003 From: lynch at agere.com (zihav) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:22:36 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85784 Tom wrote: >> I think the point I was trying to make that Narcissa is in a much better position to be the spy for the Order and not Snape. We do know Snape is getting information, but from who and how? Narcissa is the who I believe and I just wanted to establish motive>> Carol replied: > Tom, as I mentioned in another post, Narcissa is not trustworthy. She's the one Kreacher went to when Sirius (unthinkingly) ordered him to get out and she passed on Kreacher's information to Lucius, who passed it to Voldemort. So she's connected to the plan to lure Harry to the MoM thinking that Sirius is in danger. Not a person likely to give information to Snape. If he blows his cover to her (which I don't think for a moment he would do), he's in big trouble.> Hi Carol, I agree there is a hole in my theory where Kreacher is concerned, but we don't know *who* else was in the house when Kreacher arrived. It could have been the entire lot of DE's that escaped from Azkaban prison. Narcissa knows that Harry is at Hogwarts and probably believed he would be protected there and how was he going to leave the school without someone in the Order knowing, she couldn't have seen all the events at the time and simply would have reported again that Voldemort was trying to trick Harry to go to the MoM. Remember she has to keep her cover or else she'll be cursed. We just need a bit more information of who and what was in the house when Kreacher arrived. If this is wrong then is there another character that Snape could go to who would have information on the DE's and Voldemort? Tom From Siran1 at gmx.de Mon Nov 24 16:10:52 2003 From: Siran1 at gmx.de (Chris) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:10:52 +0100 Subject: there wasn't a wizard who turned who wasn't in Slytherin? Message-ID: <003901c3b2a5$a4cf41a0$6744b5ac@OEMCOMPUTER> No: HPFGUIDX 85785 Hi They always say, that there wasn't a wizard who turned who wasn't in Slytherin. But Wormtail is a Death Eater and he would be in Griffindor or if they believe Sirius betrayed the Potters he would be a Death Eater and he, too, is a Griffindor...? Chris [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From marylandman1115 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 17:46:34 2003 From: marylandman1115 at yahoo.com (marylandman1115) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:46:34 -0000 Subject: Hagrid a spy? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85786 I have seen a number of post on therories on spies and I have a new one. I do not know if this has been suggested before or not, if so sorry about bringing it up again. I was reading the OoP last night and in the chapter where Sirius talks to Harry, Ron, and Hermonie about Hagrid missing it came to me. What if Hagrid on his way back from seeing the giants gets separated from Madame Maxine (which we already knew since Sirius tells us this) on the way back. LV through his contacts with the giants captures Hagrid and puts him under the Imperius Curse and then lets him go to spy on the DD and the Order. It would not be the first time that LV has used Hagrid to his advantage. Who else better to use then one of the most trusted people to both Harry and DD? This would also go along with the idea that it is someone close to Harry. This would also benifit LV if he wants to attack the school. He could come through the Forbidden Forest. And, who knows the forest better than just about anyone? That's right Hagrid...... Again this is just a thought...let me know what you think. Tim From gehring13 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 17:57:24 2003 From: gehring13 at yahoo.com (gehring13) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:57:24 -0000 Subject: Third Man in the Graveyard? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85787 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: > The text of OOP doesn't really tell us who killed Sirius. It occurs > to me that we don't know who killed Cedric either. > So maybe, just maybe, there is another Death Eater present, out > of Harry's field of view, which JKR tells us several times is very > limited. It was Wormtail that killed Cedric. He was carrying Voldemort and Voldemort told him to "Kill the spare." Likewise, Sirius' cousin Bellatrix Lestrange killed Sirius. They were dueling on the dais in the Death Chamber and he paused to say "You can do better than that" and she hit him with the spell. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I've just re-read books 4 & 5 for the 4th time. -Kathy From denise at emptymirrorbooks.com Mon Nov 24 18:17:43 2003 From: denise at emptymirrorbooks.com (Denise) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 18:17:43 -0000 Subject: Neville's Gran / Neville's wand In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85788 Carol wrote: >BTW, after researching holly and yew last night, I'll be very >interested in seeing what kind of wood Neville's new wand is made of. >I hope JKR tells us! I don't know what kind of wood Neville's wand might be, but I wonder if the feather Fawkes shed as a warning will find itself in the core of it... cheers ~ Denise From alexandra_v at netcabo.pt Mon Nov 24 19:37:25 2003 From: alexandra_v at netcabo.pt (Alexandra Vieira) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 19:37:25 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives?) References: <134.2852ba96.2cf34c31@aol.com> Message-ID: <001d01c3b2c2$638e8530$864c5451@ATM> No: HPFGUIDX 85789 Hello! first of all, I'm new to the group so let me introduce myself: my name is Alexandra and I'm from Portugal, so English is not my first language. I'm sorry for some misspelings, hope you get my meaning. Now, the reason I'm posting: Eloise said: I believe that Snape blames himself for failing to protect the Potters and that his fury at Sirius is in part a projection of this. Alexandra: I don't believe that he was oh so sad to fail to protect the Potters (assuming your theory is correct) because this meant that Snape was a good person deep down and he was able to separate his grudge from reality and do the right thing. Well, I think he can't, really, at least when it comes to MWPP! He kept on provoking Sirius in OP saying that he (Sirius) did nothing and stayed home all day while he (Snape) and the rest were out there risking their necks, knowing (or even hoping for) the effect it would have in Sirius's mind. This isn't an action of someone who thinks first of the others and then of himself. And in PoA he chose to teach werewolves the day he was substituting "ill" prof. Lupin. There again, he does it on purpose! He's human... he can't help it to make mistakes and not be perfect. And I think he has a lot to suffer for. --Alexandra From houseofbohacek at earthlink.net Mon Nov 24 20:16:34 2003 From: houseofbohacek at earthlink.net (Gail Bohacek) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 15:16:34 -0500 Subject: (FILK) Yule Ball They'll Brawl *and* A New Album! Message-ID: <410-2200311124201634568@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85790 Happy to be able to filk the Beatles again... Yule Ball They'll Brawl (A FILK by Gail Bohacek to the tune of "Hello, Goodbye" by the Beatles) Midi is here: http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Studio/7779/beatle14.html Dedicated to Lilac, humungous R/H SHIP-freak that she is. Warning: It gets a bit Shippy at the end here. Harry (R/H Shippers): Ron asked, "Who will you go With tonight?" Hermione said, "No." Uh-oh Although he tries, she won't let him know He wants to know On Christmas night there'll be a fight once Ronald knows He wants to know On Christmas night there'll be a fight once Ronald knows Ron said, "Krum?" She said, "So?" "It's not right," Ron said, "He is the foe!" Low-blow Ron was uptight once he came to know (Yule Ball they'll brawl, Yule Ball they'll brawl) Ron went psycho (They'll brawl) On Christmas night there was a fight, Ron went psycho (Yule Ball they'll brawl, Yule Ball they'll brawl) 'Cause of her beau (They'll brawl) On Christmas night there was a fight 'cause of her beau I - I - I - I - I - I hate it when they fight, they fight Oh no! Like dynamite Ron started to blow Hurt his ego On Christmas night there was a fight 'tween the duo Wished I could go When on that night they had their fight, wished I could go She was mad (Was too bad) And although (But I.M.H.O.) They both yelled (Something else) It didn't come to blows (Was going on below) Whoa-oh Now with hindsight, I think that I know I think I know The reason why Ron picked that fight and caused such woe I think I know By morning's light things were all right, but I'm not slow I think I know To my delight they were polite, they let it go I think I know When Christmas night they had their fight the seeds were sown (We know-oh-oh!) (Ron and Hermione-ah! CHA CHA Ron and Hermione-ah Hey-la! Ron and Hermione...) -Gail B. ******************************************************************************************************** Red Letter Day!!!! In my continuing endeavor to see every single Beatles song filked with a Harry Potter theme I need all the help I can get. I don't even pretend that I can do it all by myself. Been filking the Beatles for a while now and to tell you the truth, it's come to the point where I can't think of any good ideas for the remaining songs on my list. Therefore I've decided to take a break and work on other projects with the thought that I could return to my list another day. However, not too long ago, CMC forwarded me a whole mess of filks written by one Lauren who had heard that we were trying to filk all the Beatles albums. Being a huge Potter-freak and Beatlemaniac herself, she practically completed the entire album "Magical Mystery Tour"! An amazing achievement, I must say. The only song she hadn't finished was "Hello, Goodbye". And so, having filked that song myself (above), I am proud to announce the completion of our third Beatles album! I would like to add that this album contains the very first Beatles filk I ever did (it was the second filk I'd ever written) which is "Privet Drive" to the tune of "Penny Lane" (ah, I remember it like it was yesterday). And now, without further ado, I am *very* pleased to present: *The Department Of Mysteries Floor* *Side 1* (Magical Mystery Tour) *The Department Of Mysteries Floor by Lauren (below) *Magical History Bore by CMC http://home.att.net/~coriolan/faculty/ghosts.htm.#Magical_History_Bore (The Fool On The Hill) *The Fool In The Hut by Lauren (below) *The Bug On The Sill by Gail B. http://home.att.net/~coriolan/gofire,htm#The_Bug_On_The_Sill *Flying (instrumental) This is the song that was playing on the radio while Harry and Ron were flying the Ford Anglia to Hogwarts (Blue Jay Way) * Wisteria Way by Lauren (below) (Your Mother Should Know) *When Voldemort Ruled by Lauren (below) (I Am the Walrus) *Flying The Car by Lauren (below) *I Am A Werewolf by Gail B. http://home.att.net/~coriolan/faculty/lupin.htm#I_Am_A_Werewolf *Side 2* *Yule Ball They'll Brawl (Hello Goodbye) by Gail B. (Strawberry Fields Forever) *We'll Play Quidditch Forever by Lauren (below) *Forbidden Forest Forever by CMC http://home.att.net/~coriolan/places/beasts.htm#Forbidden_Forest_Forever (Penny Lane) *The D.A. by Lauren (below) *Privet Drive by Gail B. http://home.att.net/~coriolan/stone.htm#Privet_Drive *Potter's Fame by Gryffleraverin http://home.att.net/~coriolan/students/harry.htm#Potter's_Fame (Baby You're a Rich Man) *Harry You're A Wizard by Lauren (below) *Harry, Yer A Wizard by Gail B. http://home.att.net/~coriolan/stone.htm#Harry,_Yer_A_Wizard (All You Need Is Love) *All You Need Is SPEW by Lauren (below) ******************************************************************************************************** Filks by Lauren, Filk Maven 1st Class: The Department of Mysteries Floor (Magical Mystery Tour) Come up, come up to the Department of Mysteries Floor Go right this way Come up, come up to the Mysteries Floor Come up, come up to the Mysteries Floor Come up, I?ve just sent him a vision Come up to the Mysteries Floor Come up, He'll soon go on a mission Come up to the Mysteries Floor He'll come to the Mysteries Floor To take his godfather away?take his godfather away Come up, come up to the Mysteries Floor Come up, come up to the Mysteries Floor Come up, I'll get the prophecy I need Come up to the Mysteries Floor Come up, I am certain to succeed He'll come to the Mysteries Floor To take his godfather away?take his godfather away The Department of Mysteries Aaaahhhh The Department of Mysteries Floor Come up, come up to the Mysteries Floor Come up, I've just sent him a vision Come up to the Mysteries Floor Come up, He'll soon go on a mission Come up to the Mysteries Floor He'll come to the Mysteries Floor To take his godfather away?take his godfather away He'll come to the Mysteries Floor To take his godfather away?take his godfather away, Take him today The Fool in the Hut (The Fool on the Hill) Day after day, alone in the hall A giant with a cardboard box is keeping perfectly still Nobody wants to know him, they can see that he?s half giant Eventually they expelled him He?s the fool in the hut Who walks up the school grounds And he uses his umbrella To help him get around Well on the way, he walks through the town When Dumbledore walks up to him and says perfectly loud ?Hagrid, we need you to go and get the Potter boy? He left and no one noticed The fool in the hut Who walks up the school grounds And he uses his umbrella To help him get around Wisteria Way (Blue Jay Way) There?s a fog out side today My cousin has lost his way ?I will knock you out? he says Now I've lost my wand instead Please don't stay long Please don't you stay very long Please don't stay long Or we may have no souls As my hands searched for my wand I knew my time was almost gone Dudley lay there on the street A dementor he'd soon meet Please don't stay long Please don't you stay very long Please don't stay long Or we may have no souls I said Lumos to my wand Because my soul may soon be gone Soon will be the break of day Sitting here in Wisteria Way Please don't stay long Please don't you stay very long Please don't stay long Or we may have no souls Please don't stay long Please don't you stay very long Please don't stay long Or we may have no souls When Voldemort Ruled (You're Mother Should Know) Moody: Let?s settle down and learn of a spell That people used to kill, when Voldemort ruled Death Eaters used it thirteen years ago, When Voldemort ruled, (Ah, when he ruled) When Voldemort ruled (Ah ah) Copy this down: There are three curses, Unforgivable The worst was used to kill when Voldemort ruled With this curse many people met their doom, When Voldemort ruled (Ah, when he ruled) When Voldemort ruled (Ah ah) Lift up your wands and point them at me And say the words: ?Avada Kedavra? I wouldn't get more than a small nose bleed. Such power you need. (Ah, power) For it to succeed. (Ah ah) Such power you need. (Ah, power) For it to succeed. (Ah ah) I'll say it again: There are three curses, Unforgivable The worst was used to kill when Voldemort ruled With this curse many people met their doom, When Voldemort ruled (Ah, when he ruled) When Voldemort ruled (Ah ah) When Voldemort ruled (Ah, when he ruled) When Voldemort ruled (Ah ah) When Voldemort ruled (Ah, when he ruled) When Voldemort ruled (Ah ah) Flying the Car (I am the Walrus) Snape: Look right here, you are here Driving the car that muggles saw up flying If you were both in Slytherin house You'd be expelled?Explain yourselves. Ron: We were at the platform, walking through the barrier We couldn't get through, then the train left without us We didn't have any choice, We had to take the car. Harry: We really had to. Snape: The Muggles saw you. Dumbledore: Quiet, Professor. It?s not up to you. Snape: They flew here from London city, Risking the exposure of our world Look at them fly that car up in the sky A damaged tree, too?They're flying They're fly- they're flying They're fly- Ron: That?s alright, professor We'll go up and get our things McGonagall: What do you mean, Weasley? I will not expel you Well at least I won't expel you today, anyhow Harry: Thank you, professor Snape: I hate you, Potter They should expel you I can't stand you two McGonagall: Still, I must impress upon you of the seriousness of what you've done, you'll get detention and a letter to your folks Dumbledore: You're free to go now I hope that you know now Not to take flying cars up to school Off to bed, you two Back up in the common room there is a party that was planned for you (hooch, Heh, hah aha) See how they laugh All on your behalf See how they think you're amazing Fred and George are jealous Back up in Gryffindor tower ?Why couldn't you let us come with you in the flying car?? Man, you should have seen their faces when we said hello. Got away from Fred Ron was filled with dread Climbed up the steps and went up to bed As our story was spread (Random muttering) The D.A. (Penny Lane) In the D.A., there is a table full of sneakoscopes And there are many shelves of books lining the walls In the room Dobby calls ?Come and Go? Harry stares at Cho As the twenty-eight begin to fill the D.A. room Marietta will soon stab them in the back Yet, disarming skills the students lack Smith?s wand flies away Very strange The D.A. is in my ears and in my eyes Filled with students as I hear them cry? ?Expelliarmus? By lesson three, Parvati mastered the reductor curse Bringing some Dark Detectors out of the scene Zacharias Smith is acting mean But it goes unseen The D.A. is in my ears and in my eyes Fighting Umbridge who we all despise?behind her back Harry Potter is proud of his new Defense class In O.W.L.s they all are sure to get an ?A? And though he wishes that he could stay They leave anyway They take a galleon that will tell them when the meetings are The idea taken from the Dark Lord?s men Hermione used a protean charm on them To make them the same Very strange The D.A. is in my ears and in my eyes In the room that no one else can find we practice all we can The D.A. is in my ears and in my eyes Practicing away from prying eyes The D.A? Strawberry Fields Forever Let me take you down ?Cause I?m going to the Quidditch field Where life is surreal There?s nothing to get hung about We'll play Quidditch forever Living is easy when you know how to play Quidditch up with me Playing is never hard and you know it will always work out Let me take you down ?Cause I'm going to the Quidditch field Where life is surreal There?s nothing to get hung about We'll play Quidditch forever No one, I think, would disagree Zooming around up high and low Leaving behind all your troubles, It?s suddenly alright and nothing ever will be bad Let me take you down ?Cause I'm going to the Quidditch field Where life is surreal There?s nothing to get hung about We'll play Quidditch forever Some people hate our sport, but to me it always feels just like a dream And I don't know if what I'm doing is right or wrong It always seems just right to me Let me take you down ?Cause I'm going to the Quidditch field Where life is surreal There?s nothing to get hung about We'll play Quidditch forever We'll play Quidditch forever We'll play Quidditch forever Harry, You're a Wizard (Baby, You're a Rich Man) Hagrid: My name is Rubeus, I'm the gamekeeper at Hogwarts I've come to tell you what you are You're a wizard, Harry Harry: None of that can be true at all You can't really mean me Hagrid: Have you ever made anything happen when you were sad? Vernon: He'll never be going there. Harry: How could you two have known? Vernon: We won't pay to send him there. My final answer?s ?no?! Hagrid: Harry, you're a wizard Harry, you're a wizard Harry, you're a wizard, too. Just like you're parent?s were before they died. I thought you knew. They're so untrue. Harry, you're a wizard Harry, you're a wizard Harry, you're a wizard, too. Now that you know that you're one of the magical people, You can come leave with me. I will take you away. You'll go to Diagon Alley. Harry: I don't know what to say. I'll soon be a wizard I'll soon be a wizard I'll soon be a wizard, too. I won't have to stay here for one more day Now I'll have friends. A magic wand, too. Hagrid: (Harry) Harry, you're a wizard Harry, you're a wizard Harry, you're a wizard, too. Harry: I'll soon be a wizard I'll soon be a wizard I'll soon be a wizard, too. All You Need is Spew Spew, spew, spew Spew, spew, spew Spew, spew, spew Spew, spew, spew There?s no elf you can free that can't be freed You always have to help an elf in need And for their justice we will fight in their name It?s easy. Spew, spew, spew We need to make the people understand And for their rights we will demand Elves will be free everywhere we can expand It?s easy. All you need is Spew All you need is Spew All you need is Spew, Spew Spew is all you need All you need is Spew All you need is Spew All you need is Spew, Spew Spew is all you need Spew, spew, spew No house-elf can be freed without you That?s why everyone should join Spew Think of all the things that we can do by ourselves It?s easy. All you need is Spew All you need is Spew All you need is Spew, Spew Spew is all you need All you need is Spew (Altogether now) All you need is Spew (Everybody now) All you need is Spew All you need is Spew, Spew Spew is all you need Spew is all you need (Spew is all you need) Spew is all you need (Spew is all you need) Spew is all you need (Spew is all you need) Gail Bohacek houseofbohacek at earthlink.net Why Wait? Move to EarthLink. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bercygirl2 at aol.com Mon Nov 24 20:12:18 2003 From: bercygirl2 at aol.com (bercygirl2) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 20:12:18 -0000 Subject: there wasn't a wizard who turned who wasn't in Slytherin? In-Reply-To: <003901c3b2a5$a4cf41a0$6744b5ac@OEMCOMPUTER> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85791 Chris wrote: > They always say, that there wasn't a wizard who turned who wasn't in > Slytherin. But Wormtail is a Death Eater and he would be in Griffindor or if > they believe Sirius betrayed the Potters he would be a Death Eater and he, > too, is a Griffindor...? Hagrid was the one who said that all the wizards who went bad were in Slytherin. You can't always take a character's word for things in HP. Bercygirl From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Mon Nov 24 20:22:23 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 20:22:23 -0000 Subject: there wasn't a wizard who turned who wasn't in Slytherin? In-Reply-To: <003901c3b2a5$a4cf41a0$6744b5ac@OEMCOMPUTER> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85793 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Chris" wrote: > They always say, that there wasn't a wizard who turned who wasn't in > Slytherin. But Wormtail is a Death Eater and he would be in Griffindor or if > they believe Sirius betrayed the Potters he would be a Death Eater and he, > too, is a Griffindor...? > > Chris Now Siriusly Snapey Susan: As I said in message 85438 a few days ago... But please keep in mind that it was just *Hagrid* who said, "There wasn't a witch or wizard who went bad that wasn't in Slytherin" [paraphrased]. In CoS, JKR says that MORE of the dark wizards came from Slytherin than from any of the other houses; she doesn't say they ALL came from Slytherin. When I read this statement in CoS last night, I was able to take Hagrid's SS/PS comment as just a tad bit of hyperbole. Siriusly Snapey Susan From C_fax at hotmail.com Mon Nov 24 20:52:17 2003 From: C_fax at hotmail.com (ceefax2002) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 20:52:17 -0000 Subject: Lupin's Compassion and Draco's Parentage (WAS Re: Lupin/ShortMemory/Boar/Madam/S In-Reply-To: <009801c3b195$20984780$6401a8c0@vaio> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85794 (snip all the Lupin stuff) > Catherine McK: > > << I'm happy with Narcissa spying on either side - just as long as she > > gets a good part! And if the blonde hair is a clue that she is a > > metamorphmagus like her niece, she could be a very good spy indeed! >> > > Catlady: > > Oh, ouch! Then Draco could be a metamorphmagus and his resemblance to > > Lucius reveal nothing about his paternity. > > But Draco couldn't have used his metamorphmagus ability from birth, and he > wouldn't have known to make himself look like Lucius. Lucius would surely > have been suspicious if "his" new son had, say, bright red hair (no, I don't > suspect Arthur of having an affair with Narcissa! although, come to think of > it, that could make a good fanfic). Is it possible that Narcissa could have > disguised Draco's true appearance somehow, if he isn't Lucius's son? Any > magical change might have been difficult if not impossible to hide, but > there's always good old Muggle hair dye. > > Melissa, who thinks Draco most likely is Lucius's son but appreciates the > dramatic possibilities if he isn't Personally I think Lucius IS Draco's dad, pretty much for the reasons outlined above, but even if Narcissa had been a bad girl (your husband's out every night torturing muggles, you get so *bored*, and that kay*ooot* little squib you hired to prune the roses *will* keep bending over...), Lucius's the one who's been around for the whole child raising thing, as is fairly evident from Draco's imprinting. So finding out his real dad's a paragon of virtue at this stage isn't going to do a lot of good. Ceef. From syndicateblue at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 21:36:53 2003 From: syndicateblue at yahoo.com (syndicateblue) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 21:36:53 -0000 Subject: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85795 jwcpgh wrote: >It's also telling that while Snape had *two* opportunities to finish- off Sirius himself (the first when Sirius charged at him, the second when he awoke after the Dementors were driven away), he chose to do the right thing and turn Sirius over to proper authorities (he even bothered to put Sirius on a stretcher, which was much nicer than the way Sirius transported the unconscious Snape [i.e. letting Snape's head bump and scrape against the passage ceiling]). So Snape showed a lot of retraint considering his history with, and volatile emotions toward, Sirius. > I have to agree with everything you said except for that paragraph. To say that Snape's motives were benevolent and restrained here seems to be a bit naive. To me, this opinion overlooks the fact that Snape probably knew that by not finishing Sirius off, and by "turning him over to proper authorities," Sirius would likely receive the Dementor's Kiss, a fate far worse than death. Or at the very least he would be put back in Azkaban, which is also a fate worse than death. So an alternative explanation of Snape's motive would be that Snape was only able to restrain himself because he knew he would be duly rewarded for it when Sirius received an even worse fate. And Snape would also come out smelling like a rose, saving three students from death and bringing the most wanted wizard in the world to justice. An Order of Merlin, First Class for sure. Syndicateblue. From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Mon Nov 24 21:42:10 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 21:42:10 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's broken nose In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FC27B32.5050304@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85796 sylviablundell2001 wrote: > Neville's broken nose had the effect of making him mis-pronounce his > words, the spell coming out as "Stubefy!" It was thus ineffective. If > a wizard had a natural speech defect, a lisp, for example, or an > inability to pronounce the letter "r", would this also affect his > ability to cast spells? Would he have to undergo elocution lessons? > Or could it be put right by a simple spell? > Sylvia (just curious) Angel adds: There's two interesting points to add to this. The first is in Flitwick's first lesson, where he cautions that students should pronounce things properly, citing a wizard that didn't. The second is the spell that Dolohov uses on Hermione, wordlessly. These two instances seem to be slightly contradictory. Any ideas? [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Mon Nov 24 21:42:13 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 21:42:13 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's animus toward the Potters/the prophecy (was Replay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85797 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > > And I have to disagree with you Kneazy (and agree qith Carol). You > seem to believe that only a character that gets violent is a proper > hero... I guess that means you don't consider real life characters > like Gandhi and Mandela proper heroes... Kneasy: Admired, yes. Heroes? There are many who consider that Ghandi, though adulated as the proximate cause of Indian freedom, was more than a bit of a fraud in his personal life. Nehru ruefully pointed out that it took three very rich men to keep Ghandi in poverty. The lifestyle he lived (and recommended as a model for others) was totally inappropriate and unrealistic for any normal Indian citizen. Remember, he didn't even visit India until he was an adult. He was a lawyer in South Africa. The Babu image, with a blanket round his shoulders was a later affectation. His insistence on freedom now, without bothering about practical problems was also one of the causes that lead to the deaths of millions when post-independence partition between India and Pakistan was enforced. And wasn't Nelson Mandela a self-confessed (though he later explained it as the need to do *something*) active member of a terrorist group? Or would you define him as a freedom fighter? Many do when it is for a cause they support. (In his position I would have done exactly the same thing.) You call him a hero even though he sought a violent solution but you would consider Harry to be evil for doing the same thing. History often glosses over inconvenient episodes if they detract from the preferred image. No, IMO they became statesmen in the finest meaning of the word. But to be defined as a hero, you need to perform an heroic act. My dictionary defines 'hero' as follows:- 1. (Gk Hist) A man of superhuman strength, courage and ability, favoured by the gods; a demigod. 2. A man, now also a woman, distinguished by the performance of extraordinarily brave or noble deeds; an illustrious warrior 3. The chief male character in a song or story Since Harry isn't in a Greek tragedy , 1. is out. He already fits 3. But it's 2. that I want him to be. Berit: > Where the difference between the hero and > the villain seems to be just one thing: The bad guy is the one who > kicks first. The good guy is the one who kicks back. And they both > live by the rule "an eye for an eye", retaliates and repays evil with > the same amount of violence, ending with the "good" guy beating the > bad guy to a bloody pulp at the end of the movie. And serves him > right of course :-). > > But what does that DO to the presumably "good guy"? How can someone > stay intrinsically "good" when the actions he's forced to perform are > in essence "evil"? What's so heroic about avenging evil actions with > the same evil medicine? How does it make him different other than the > fact that he was not the first to maime or kick or kill? In my > opinion; what makes a good guy different from a bad guy is that he > chooses not to use the same evil means to reach his goal. He has a > different "work ethics" so to speak. If he didn't, there wouldn't be > any bad guys and good guys, just equally bad guys destroying each > other over disagreements. > Kneasy: I can see we'll never agree. Was Horatio on the bridge evil? Of course not. Were the Spartans at Thermopylae evil? Nope. Nor, as I pointed out in my previous post were St George, Beowulf or King Arthur. TV and Hollywood may have degraded the meaning of the word, but true heroes are those that put their lives on the line to protect the vulnerable. It can be a person, a society or an ideal that is beleaguered, but it is much, much more than just personal revenge or self defence. There seems to be a view that the use of any kind of force is evil, whatever the circumstances. So tell me, how else would scouges such as Ghengis Khan, Tamerlane, Hitler, the Thugees or Bader-Meinhof be resisted and defeated? Talk won't do it. Compromise is just letting the camel's nose into the tent. They are (were) commited to the final and total destruction of everything not of them. Not every opponent is rational. Force is sometimes necessary and justified. And using it does not mean you become as they are, any more than putting down a rabid dog makes you a murderer. Now I would categorise Voldy as on a par with Bader-Meinhof. Harry is responsible for the protection of his world against those that wish to destroy it. Voldy was winning at one time. He was not driven back by words or compromises but by a fortunate circumstance. Now he's back and he's going to start killing the innocent again. He won't be stopped by throwing gentle thoughts at him (or if he is JKR is not the quality of writer I think she is). This doesn't call for his repentence, what we want is retribution, catharsis, a balancing of the books. Berit: > And I believe Rowling hints at this in her books. It's subtle, but > easy to see. Remember; Dumbledore (and Hermione) are often > Rowling's "voice" in the books. I don't have direct quotes, but his > viewpoint is always that it's wrong to act like the evil side would > act. Example: Dumbledore does not approve of Dementors as allies. > NcGonagall has said about him that there's lot of things he has the > power to do, but he doesn't. Because it would not be right. > Dumbledore has integrity. He has a high moral standard. And I think > it's significant that Harry's strength (according to DD) is love in > some form rather than Avada Kedavra skills... Kneasy: DD doesn't want the Dementors as allies because he can't *trust* them. ("Voldemort can offer them so much more" is the phrase he uses.) He tells Voldy that there are things worse than death and this is what he threatens Voldy with. Doesn't sound compassionate to me. Yes, there are things he won't do. But, to coin a phrase, just because you won't stab someone in the back, it doesn't mean you won't kill them face to face in a fair fight. DD may be moral, but he wants Voldy destroyed. Voldy kills for no good reason, he enjoys inflicting pain and suffering. To say that the person who kills him is sinking to his level is to equate surgery with sadism. From eloiseherisson at aol.com Mon Nov 24 21:43:23 2003 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:43:23 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ul Message-ID: <172.228ecbc2.2cf3d57b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85798 Alexandra: >Hello! first of all, I'm new to the group so let me introduce myself Eloise: A very warm welcome! Wonderful! A new person to talk Snape with! Alexandra: >>Eloise said: >>I believe that Snape blames himself for failing to protect the Potters and >>that his fury at Sirius is in part a projection of this. Alexandra: > don't believe that he was oh so sad to fail to protect the Potters (assuming >your theory is correct) because this meant that Snape was a good person deep >down and he was able to separate his grudge from reality and do the right thing. Eloise: Ah, but I didn't say he was *sad*, did I? Let me be clear: Snape hated James. But Snape had changed sides and protecting the Potters was now part of his role. This is a key part of my thinking. He was trying his best to protect James *whom he hated* and Lily whom - well, I don't know what he thought about Lily; I'm agnostic on that point. Failing to protect them was in a way all the worse for that. What I think makes him angry, the thing I think he is particularly sensitive about, is *failing*. And in this case he failed to do something that he really didn't *want* to do, but had tried to do out of duty and against his instinct. I have always believed that Snape is *intellectually* on the right side, but that internally he still has a very Dark side which he struggles all the time to control. Alexandra: >Well, I think he can't, really, at least when it comes to MWPP! He kept on >provoking Sirius in OP saying that he (Sirius) did nothing and stayed home all >day while he (Snape) and the rest were out there risking their necks, knowing >(or even hoping for) the effect it would have in Sirius's mind. This isn't an >action of someone who thinks first of the others and then of himself. And in PoA >he chose to teach werewolves the day he was substituting "ill" prof. Lupin. >There again, he does it on purpose! Eloise: Oh yes! Well, I'm not sure it's exactly on purpose, I think he just can't help himself. I have never ever argued that Snape isn't deeply flawed, that he doesn't harbour grudges. He does. Massively. Mind you, Sirius wasn't much better... *But*...he changed sides; he risked (and continues to risk) his neck; he is trusted by Dumbledore; despite the fact that he makes Harry's life a misery, again and again he demonstrates care for him (not in the sense of "caring about" him, but in the sense of protecting him). Why? Why did he change sides? Why does this deeply flawed and unpleasant individual constantly seem to be trying to do the right thing? Why do we find him in situations where he is trying to protect first James and then Harry, neither of whom, apparently, he can stand? Those are the questions that got me hooked on HP. They are the questions that brought me to this forum nearly two years ago. And I'm still trying to work out the answers. Alexandra: >He's human... he can't help it to make mistakes and not be perfect. And I think >he has a lot to suffer for. Most definitely! And I'm sure he's suffering now because, despite all his taunts, *Sirius* is the one who died the hero's death whilst he, ironically, was the one who had to stay hidden away and couldn't take part on the show-down at the MOM. Poor Severus. I shall be devastated if JKR kills him off, but I'd rather he died heroically than go through the whole of the series never quite achieving that which he so desperately needs, never proving to himself his own worth. ~Eloise [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From abigailnus at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 22:00:10 2003 From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 22:00:10 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Bill Weasley is Ever So Evil parts 1 & 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85799 The morning TBAY sun slants into a rather opulent stateroom on the Imperius!Arthur trimaran. Abigail, acting captain of the trimaran, is curled up in her four-poster bed, attempting to ignore the rapidly aging day. Her slumber is disturbed by a smart rapping sound on the cabin door. Abigail turns over, attempting to cover her head with a pillow, and ends up tumbling off the bed. A deck hand gingerly cracks open the door. "Ma'am?" He ventures. "Are you decent?" Behind the bed, a pile of sheets and pillows offers a tentative "Wstfgl?" The deck hand clicks his tongue disapprovingly, and retreats into Abigail's dressing room. He emerges carrying her much-abused, frequently torn and patched, many-pocketed overcoat, which he drapes, with much ceremony, over the acting captain's shoulders. She gets to her feet rather shakily and squints at him, trying to remember his name or, failing that, hers. "Mphgrush." She offers. The deck hand sighs, and procures from the dumb-waiter a steaming mug of tea. He waves it under Abigail's nose. The wafting fumes seem to revive her. She blinks, scowls, and rears over the impassive deck hand. "What time do you call this, Mr ..." She flails about helplessly for a moment. "... sailor?" "I call it 10 o'clock in the morning, ma'am." Replies the deck hand promptly and, seeing Abigail about to burst into a full tantrum, quickly adds. "And I'm sorry to have woken you at this ungodly hour, but something came up that I thought you'd like to know. You see, Miss Erin hasn't come back." "Come back from where?" Abigail demands, gulping down her tea as she strides above deck, the deck hand hurrying to keep up. "You remember, ma'am, don't you?" He replies. "You gave her some shore-leave last night. She said she wanted to theorize about something other then Imperius!Arthur." Abigail furrows her brow, and nods slowly. "Yes, that's right. Well, I certainly can't keep young, energetic theorists cooped up on this tub when there's a whole 'BAY to romp in. That's where mutinies come from, you know." "Yes, ma'am." The deck hand answers eagerly. "In that case, ma'am, might I also request..." "Not you, Mr... sailor." Abigail waves him off brusquely. "You're not a theorist. You are a TBAY denizen. Now, what's this about Erin being missing?" The deck hand counts to a sufficiently high number, and, in a remarkably calm voice, replies. "Well, she left for the shore last night, and she still hasn't returned. Don't you think we ought to see if she's in any trouble?" "Trouble? Pshaw." Abigail waves expansively. "Erin is a big girl, and there's plenty to see in the 'BAY. She'll come back when she's good and ready." Just then, a wave emanating from the shore causes the remarkably steady triple hull of the Imperius!Arthur trimaran to list. Abigail's teacup leaps from her hands, dousing both her and the deck hand, and the force of the ship's movement sends them both sprawling on the deck. "Mr... sailor!" Abigail exclaims, getting to her feet. "Do you know what that was? Someone has Rocked the Boat! Only a card-carrying member of the Imperius!Arthur trimaran openly questioning the theory's canon could do that!" She rounds on the deck hand, who is just getting to his feet. "Was it you? I'll have you court-martialed if it was." "No, ma'am." The deck hand answers patiently. "As you were so kind to point out only a few minutes ago, I am only a TBAY denizen. I can't theorize. It must have been either you or Miss Erin." Abigail looks pensive. "It wasn't me, was it?" She asks. "I didn't say anything..." "In my experience, ma'am." The long-suffering deck hand answers. "When you Rock the Boat, there's a lot more then just spilled tea to cry over." "True enough." Abigail replies. "It must have been Erin, then." From one of her many pockets, she procures a spyglass, through which she examines the shore. "And do you know what? That wave came from the direction of the Royal George Tavern. There's no telling what amount of damage Erin could do there unsupervised." Abigail snaps the spyglass shut with a satisfying 'thunk' and squares her shoulders. "Mr... sailor, set course for the shore!" ------------------------------ The Royal George is doing a brisk breakfast business when Abigail shows up, wearing a tea-stained nightdress, rubber boots, and her many-pocketed overcoat. She finds herself a stool by the bar and flags George down, ordering some eggs and a fresh cup of tea. He brings her her food, and then leans against the bar as they watch Erin holding forth to a growing group of theorists, some of them old TBAY hands and a few green newcomers. "What's the story then, George?" Abigail asks between mouthfulls of scrambled eggs. "That girl" George answers testily, "Had me up half the night gallivanting in the forest." He stops at the conspiratorial twinkle in Abigail's eye. "Not like that! She spent the entire time on characterization! Do you know what she's selling over there? ESE!Bill, that's what." "Hmmm." Abigail answers, intrigued. She picks up her food and tea, and moves closer to where Erin is sitting. "What's this about Bill then, Erin?" "Oh, hello, Abigail!" Erin answers brightly. "Isn't it exciting? There've been some quite positive reactions so far. Do you want to hear about it?" Without waiting for a reply, she launches into a rather exhaustive explanation. Abigail listens to the first two parts silently as she eats, but before Erin gets the chance to offer her concluding chapter, she interrupts. "In general, I like the idea of the modern betrayer being a contemporary of Harry (relatively speaking), rather then a contemporary of his parents. For one thing, if there has to be a spy or a betrayer - and I'm in no means convinced that there is - then the selection of adult figures who might fit the job is rather disappointing. Sure, Evil!McGonagall has its moments, and people have a lot of fun taking Evil!Lupin out for a ride, but none of them really... Well, none of them really Bang. Harry being betrayed by someone closer to his own age is a bit more interesting, and the choice of Bill is quite appropriate. Bill is almost unquestioningly trusted due to his relationship to Ron, and Ron's obvious admiration of him. On the other hand, he's not so far in Harry's inner circle that a betrayal by him would be seen as completely out of character, such as Evil!Hermione or Evil!Neville. Plus, unlike Harry's exact contemporaries, Bill has had some time out of school in which to actually see the world and be corrupted. ESE!Bill doesn't require the betrayer to have been evil since pre-school age." "However, I have to question some of your canon. I think you may be casting too wide a net. For example, take your analysis of Bill's clothes." "That's right." Erin replies, getting comfortable in her seat. "Bill dresses like a disaffected teenager. What kind of behavior is this for a man already in his twenties, with a respectable job? No wonder Molly is always on his case to cut his hair." Abigail frowns. "Bill works for a bank, but he isn't a banker. He's a curse-breaker. He doesn't work out of an office, meeting with clients, but in the dusty Egyptian desert. His job includes venturing into dangerous places. sealed against all who might encroach, seeking treasure." Abigail turns to Erin with a smirk. "Don't you see, Erin? Bill is Indiana Jones." Erin, who was taking a sip of her drink, begins to cough it up, and Abigail spends a few minutes slapping her back before she can resume talking. "Under these circumstances, it makes no sense for Bill to wear fancy clothes, or take too much trouble with his hair. He does tend to overplay the 'cool' angle, but I suspect that's in the job description. I imagine that people who work as curse-breakers have the same work dynamic and personality that we saw among the Aurors in OOP. Harry describes them as an irreverent bunch, and if Tonks is any indication, being a bit punky won't disqualify you. These are people who live on the edge, it only makes sense that their appearance and behavior would reflect that. In fact," Abigail pauses. "The only thing about Bill's work that strikes me as odd is the ease with which he was able to finagle a transfer to the London office. I'd imagine that his qualifications are quite different from the ones required to work in an office all day." "Okay, so maybe Bill doesn't go to work in a suit." Erin concedes. "But why does he wear those kind of clothes to dinner with his family, especially when he knows they bug his mother? He's just trying get a rise out of her. And what's with the gratuitous swearing, anyway? None of the other kids say 'damn' in front of their mother." At Erin's words, Abigail assumes a pained expression. "Are you sure you want to do that, Erin?" She asks, clearly hoping that the answer will be no. "Do what?" Erin replies quizzically. "Walk into the Weasley Family Dynamics morass." Abigail says, obviously hating the sound of the very words. "Specifically, the unplottable depths of the Molly's Mothering Skills Swamp, now with extra quicksand! Trust me, kid, you go down that road, there's no telling if you'll ever come back. Surely you've noticed that any discussion of Molly's relationship with her children inevitably gets bogged down in unresolveable differences of opinion regarding Molly. It's the whole Mothering/Smothering debate. Don't do it." "But I'm not talking about Molly here." Erin insists. "At least not yet. I'm talking about Bill intentionally dressing to upset her." "Is he?" Abigail's eyes are wide. "Some people might see Molly's attempts to dress her twenty-something son, to *cut his hair*, for heaven's sake, as babying him. They might conclude that Bill might indeed be dressing to annoy his mother, but that this is a reaction to her own behavior. And then you've entered an infinite loop - Bill acts out because Molly stifles him because he acts out, and so on and so forth ad nauseum. And the thing is, I don't even see that dynamic at play. Bill's behavior at the dinner is completely calm. He reacts to his mother's nagging with bemusement. He is neither annoyed, nor is he actively trying to annoy. I think that if Bill were truly oppressed by his mother's dress code, he'd either conform to it or make a big deal out of not conforming. He does neither, and I think this behavior is supposed to tell us (and Molly) that he's a grown man, and this is how he dresses when he dresses casually. He's not shoving it down his mother's throat, because he has no desire, like Percy and the Twins, to get into that vicious circle with her, and being an adult, he doesn't have to. He's a grown up, and that's that." But Erin is having none of it. "Hang on, I'm not done with Molly yet." She says sternly. Abigail sighs. "I'm begging you here, kid." "Just one more thing!" Erin cries enthusiastically. "Haven't you ever wondered why Molly always takes Percy as an example for the twins when she could impress them much more by taking Bill? After all, he was Head Boy too, and the Twins most certainly respect him a lot more than Percy." "I don't believe that has anything to do with Bill, actually." Abigail says, as she begins searching through her pockets. "Tell me, have you visited The Stubby Boardman Modern Art Wing at the Canon Museum recently?" Finally, Abigail finds what she was looking for. She hands Erin a slightly grubby, much folded and refolded, formerly glossy brochure announcing an art exhibit. "The Next Generaional Parellels." Erin reads. "I heard about this. What does it have to do with Bill?" "Look at the artist's notes in the back." Abigail prods. "The bit about Ron right there." Erin screws up her eyes against the tiny letters, and reads out: >>The Weasley children seem to fall into two camps. The Charlie camp, which seems to include Fred, George and Ginny, is more rambunctious, less concerned with rules, more physical and has interests that lean towards the dangerous and irreverent. The Bill camp, which includes Percy and Ron, tends to be more responsible. They have positions of authority both in and out of Hogwarts, and tend to be more concerned about propriety. (The two groups are also apparently divided by body types - Bill and his group are taller and thinner, whereas Charlie and his group are shorter and stockier.)>> "Now, given your claim that Bill is Ever So Evil, we might as well retitle the two camps Molly and Arthur." Abigail explains. "Arthur is an intelligent, responsible man, but we all know that he's given to flights of whimsy, and is capable of being quite silly. He thinks very little of appearances, and tends to have a more permissive outlook. Molly, on the other hand, is quite concerned with propriety and the appearance of it, and seems more aware of financial concerns then her husband (but then, that may be more a function of her role in the home). Each of the Weasley children show characteristics of both their parents, but to differing degrees. Fred and George, for example, are super-Arthur, with very little Molly. Ron, Ginny, Bill and Charlie are a rather even mix, each leaning a little bit towards one of their parents. Of all the children, Percy is the only one who favors Molly completely - in fact, like the twins with their father, we might call him super-Molly." Abigail takes back the brochure, folds it, and stows it in one of her pockets. "Now, I know a parent is never supposed to play favorites. but can Molly be blamed for wanting to advance the one child that she truly sees herself in? For wanting her other children to emulate that example? I'm not saying that she's consciously trying to change her kids, but she does feel that Percy has it right (at least until OOP), and she'd like to see them along the same path." Abigail accepts another cup of tea from George. "Not to mention that, being the only child who favors his mother completely, Percy is a bit of an outsider among the Weasley kids. Molly sees this. She knows that Bill doesn't need her help to be liked by his siblings, and she's trying, in her own rather hapless way, to place Percy in the same position. She's the mother who thinks that the cool kids are the A-students (and, given her older sons, who were A-students on top of being cool, it's not surprising that she'd believe this)." "Well, what about the Goblins?" Erin demands. "Bill seems very tight with them, and we don't even know which side they're going to choose in the coming war. They sound like dark creatures to me. Probably a prime conduit for DE-dom." "You think so?" Abigail inquires. "Because I got quite the opposite impression from OOP. In GoF, we're introduced to Goblins strictly as money-grubbing, dangerous fiends. We don't condone Ludo Bagman's actions in gambling with them, but we also don't feel that they deserve his money. In OOP, we have a rude awakening. Bill informs us that the MoM isn't hurrying to help the Goblins reacquire their lost funds, and suddenly we realize that these people have been swindled. Bill is in fact the only person seeing the Goblins as people with rights. If you gambled with someone and won, wouldn't you feel hard done-by if they just did a runner and left you holding an empty bag? We hear from both Bill and Lupin that Goblins are mistreated in Wizarding World, just like house-elves and centaurs, looked down upon as a lesser species. I don't think Bill's closeness with them is meant to have negative connotations. On the contrary, I think it's meant to shock us out of our predetermined perceptions, making us see the Goblins as good guys, deserving our support." Erin looks exasperated "Tell me, are you sure you actually like this theory? All you've done since coming here is tear down my canons." Abigail looks hurt. "Not all of them. Only the ones that didn't make any sense. Come on, let's hear another one. I bet I'll like it." "Alright, let's see what you think about this one." Erin's eyes glow. "Now, there's the scene after Voldemort's return at the end of GoF. I think it more then a little suspicious that Bill is so eager to leave. Dumbledore was saying that a 'message' would be sufficient, presumably sent by owl post, yet Bill seemed to feel Arthur *had* to be informed... in... person?" Buoyed by her conviction in her theory, Erin had momentarily forgotten whom she was speaking to. Now she falls silent as Abigail flushes and her eyes begin to glow. "J'accuse!" She cries, knocking her teacup over in her excitement and spilling it all over herself and Erin. "J'accuse, ma petite fille! You Rocked the Boat! Not once, but twice now! You're stealing Imperius!Arthur canon in order to build your new ESE!Bill!" Erin cowers. "I didn't think anyone would notice! It's only a little canon, who's it hurting anyway? Plus, there just has to be more to it then Elkins' claim that Bill wants to spare his father the pain of finding out about Voldemort's returns through a letter. Look, only a few minutes later he cuts Dumbledore off mid-speech." "I've often wished I could do that myself." Abigail remarks. Erin frowns, is it possible that Abigail is Ever So Evil? "Be that as it may." She continues after a moment. "I think Bill delivered the message to his father, and then went straight to one of those Death Eaters that Harry Potter had just so obligingly named a few minutes ago, and said 'I want to sign up.'" "Alright, so the two theories can coexist." Abigail concedes. "In fact, I think ESE!Bill is strengthened by making it dependent on Imperius!Arthur. Bill's father, a man he's supposed to admire, was felled by Voldemort, made to act against his own will. Maybe Bill figures a good way to prevent that sort of thing from happening to him is to ensure that he wants to do the things that his father was coerced into doing." "Plus," Erin continues excitedly. "This might be the solution to the mystery of Percy's behavior all through OOP. Just picture it: Bill runs straight to Percy and says 'Harry's gone mad and killed Cedric Diggory. And Dumbledore and Mum have fallen for every word of his crazy story. They actually believe Lord Voldemort has returned, and Dad and Mum are going to join this nutty Order thing of Dumbledore's'" "And then Bill goes and joins the nutty Order thing himself, and Percy doesn't find that odd?" Abigail raises an eyebrow. "Sorry, but Percy isn't that stupid. Even if he doesn't know about the Order's existence, he knows that Bill has suddenly relocated to England, and he can put two and two together. No, I like the idea that Bill poisoned Percy's mind against their parents, but I think it was a little more subtle then what you're suggesting." "Back when she first suggested Imperius!Arthur, Elkins was insistent that the older children - Bill and Charlie - knew. After all, they had simply been too old to have been kept in the dark. Even if they weren't let in on the details, they would have been able to figure it out. Likewise, the younger children - Ginny, Ron and the twins - were completely clueless. Even back then, however, Elkins felt that Percy was the question mark. In my recent adaptation of Imperius!Arthur to incorporate the new OOP canon, I suggested that the real reason that Percy had so thoroughly distanced himself from his family, the real catalyst for his loss of respect for his parents, was that someone revealed to him that his father had been an Imperius victim. I suggested that it was this legacy that Percy had been struggling against, and that Fudge, in an attempt to win the boy over, revealed Arthur's dirty little secret." Abigail's eyes twinkle as she continues. "But isn't it so much more delicious if the revelation comes from Bill? He needn't even have spelled it out. He could have simply dropped enough hints that Percy would make the connection himself, and believe that he had discovered something on his own that his parents and older brothers had conspired to keep from him. In this case, Percy would believe Bill to be on Dumbledore's side, while still being manipulated by him. Neat, isn't it?" "You," Erin says crossly, "Are trying to usurp my theory by folding it into yours. Knock it off! I don't need Bill to have revealed Arthur's Imperius past for him to subvert Percy's allegiances. Percy was ripe for the picking all through GoF anyway." "True." Abigail nods. "But with or without Imperius!Arthur, you're going to have to explain to me why Bill felt it necessary to poison Percy's mind against Dumbledore in the first place. What great victory has he achieved for Voldemort's side? Surely a young bureaucrat couldn't make a significant difference. Percy's support doesn't make a difference when it comes to Fudge's policy of burying his head in the sand - that's Fudge and Umbridge's project." Erin, taken aback, decides to ponder this question quietly. Abigail orders another cup of tea from George, and spends a few minutes examining Erin's BB GUN. It has a nice heft. "Hey, Erin?" She calls out finally. "Where did you say you got this idea anyway?" "Why, it was Errol and yourself who first put the idea in my head." Erin replies. "Remember last spring when you were both arguing over who would be the OOP death?" "Don't remind me." Abigail smiles. "We were both so far off base. I thought that Lupin was a goner, and Errol suggested Bill instead." "That's right." Erin nods. "He wondered why Bill was given so much screen time in GoF, and concluded that it had to be because he was going to die in OOP." Abigail grins. "I knew there was reason I liked this theory. Do you remember what my chief objection to Errol's suggestion was?" Before Erin can answer, Abigail procures a dusty scroll and begins to read. >>Killing off a Weasley brother moves the focus from Harry to Ron. I don't care how much a member of the Weasley family Harry feels himself to be. If Bill, whom he hardly knows, dies, the people most affected would be Ron and his family, and as we don't have direct emotional access to Ron, we wouldn't feel the full emotional impact of this death. I might think differently if we were talking about a Weasley that we know, such as Molly or Arthur, or any of the younger children, but I can't imagine that Bill or Charlie's death, even if we get to know him better throughout OOP, will have a sever influence on Harry or on us.>> "Errol disagreed with me at the time, but I think OOP bore me out." Abigail rolls up the dusty scroll. "Short of actually being in the room, Harry couldn't possibly have been more involved in the attack on Arthur. And yet he describes himself and Sirius as 'intruding on the family grief' when waiting for news of Arthur's condition. A wall comes up between the actual family members and the adopted son, and I believe this would be the case if Bill were to die. However, a betrayal to Voldemort would almost have to be a betrayal of Harry, directly or indirectly. Harry would be intimately affected, deeply hurt, and possibly imperiled by any betrayal of a Weasley family member. He wouldn't be at an emotional remove because at some level, it would all be about him. Plus, Ron's feelings won't be opaque to us as they would be in the case of a death, because those feelings would involve Harry. You remember how personally Ron took the true identity of Scabbers in PoA. Just imagine how he'll react if his brother turns out to be a traitor." "How did we get to Ron?" Erin asks. "This isn't about him." "Who is it about, then?" Abigail replies. "It certainly isn't about Bill, a minor character at most, and definitely not about Percy. It's all about Harry, of course - to some extent, every plot thread that runs through the series come back to Harry. But Ron, unlike his older brothers, is important to Harry. He's one of the most important people in his life, in fact. Harry's other best friend, Hermione, has her own plot line - her struggles in an anti-muggle world, and her civil rights crusades. What's Ron's deal?" "I've suggested several times that Bill and Percy are Ron's role models (in fact, Bill is clearly Percy's role model). If ESE!Bill pans out, then Ron has been following the wrong brother. To quote Jane Austen (although probably not accurately), one has all the goodness, and the other has all the appearance of it." Erin objects. "It's not that clear-cut. Even if Percy was influenced by Bill, he's still made some bad decisions of his own. Under ESE!Bill, neither brother is perfect." "Then I guess it's up to Ron to take only the best from each of them, and surpass them both." Abigail glances outside and notices the sun climbing in the sky. "Goodness, look at the time. Thanks for the talk, Erin. I think I'm going to stay on shore for a while, see what else you have to say about ESE!Bill. Let me know, won't you?" Abigail TBAY posts referenced in this post: ESE!Bill parts 1 and 2: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85610 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85729 Imperius!Arthur: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/40168 Imperius!Arthur post-OOP: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/77654 Generational Parallels: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/78098 Bill is Ever So Dead (discussion with Errol): http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/55224 From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Mon Nov 24 22:39:50 2003 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 22:39:50 -0000 Subject: "Either must die at the hand of the other " (was "messy post") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85800 --- Carol wrote, in response to Iris: > The Prophecy does *not* say that neither Harry nor > Voldemort can defeat the other without dying .... > What the Prophecy actually says is "either must > die at the hand of the other for neither can live > while the other survives" (OoP Am. ed. 841). > > In other words, one will have to die at the hand > of the other, not both will kill the other. Just writing to point out something that I'm sure has been said on list at some point, although I don't recall seeing it. While the prophecy does not unambiguously say that Harry must die in killing Voldemort, it is at least open to that reading. The use of "either" in the prophecy is ambiguous. While the word is more commonly (and colloquially) used in a disjunctive sense -- referring to one or the other of a pair -- it is also used (in poetry, for instance) in a conjunctive sense, referring to both members of the pair. A common example of the second usage is the phrase "on either side," which typically means "on both sides." It appears that Harry and Dumbledore are interpreting the prophecy in the disjunctive sense, as Carol does, to mean that either Harry or Voldemort will die in their final confrontation. This explains Dumbledore's concern (assuming you credit it) with protecting Harry while he is most vulnerable, so that he will be as well-prepared as possible at the moment of truth. An alternate reading is that rather than describing two possibilities, the prophecy describes one certainty: *each* will die at the hand of the other. That reading also suggests the possibility of a more metaphorical reading of "die" -- Marj Garber fans, get your minds out of the gutter -- in which there could perhaps be some compromise of the absolutes that Harry and Voldemort represent. -- Matt From erinellii at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 23:20:10 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:20:10 -0000 Subject: Neville's broken nose In-Reply-To: <3FC27B32.5050304@cantab.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85801 > Sylvia wrote: > > Neville's broken nose had the effect of making him mis-pronounce his words, the spell coming out as "Stubefy!" It was thus ineffective. If a wizard had a natural speech defect, a lisp, for example, or an inability to pronounce the letter "r", would this also affect his ability to cast spells? > > Angel added: > There's two interesting points to add to this. The first is in > Flitwick's first lesson, where he cautions that students should > pronounce things properly, citing a wizard that didn't. The second is the spell that Dolohov uses on Hermione, wordlessly. These two instances seem to be slightly contradictory. > Any ideas? Erin: No ideas, just another question: What about foriegn wizards with accents like Fleur and Victor Krum? Surely they pronounce spells differently from the English wizards? Erin From jkscherme at adelphia.net Mon Nov 24 23:11:35 2003 From: jkscherme at adelphia.net (Kristen) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:11:35 -0000 Subject: Traitor yet again (Was: Third Man in the Graveyard?) In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20031125072308.02d063f0@pop3.xtra.co.nz> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85802 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Tanya Swaine wrote: > At 18:13 24/11/2003 +0000, you wrote: > > >Twoflower2: *nods* > > > >And this Death Eater would be the ESE Traitor of yet unknown identity. > > > >Pippin, referring to some of your earler posts, I completely agree > >with you that the series is going to have a big time traitor, and it > >is going to be one of the earlier war participants, who was > >introduced to the reader early in the series as a good guy. This > >would be the one whom Voldie really meant as "his most faithful > >servant in Hogwarts", and who, no doubt, was popping up throughout > >the whole story in the episodes like one you have just analyzed > >in "Third man" post. > > > >(huge snip) What about Hagrid? I don't think it's going to be an earlier war participant, but someone close to Dumbledore who kept LV apprised of his whereabouts, etc. Remember Knockturn Alley? What was he really doing there? My money's on him. madeyesgal; who's still hoping that Snape will turn out to be a hero. From hpfanmatt at gmx.net Mon Nov 24 23:28:38 2003 From: hpfanmatt at gmx.net (Matt) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:28:38 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess). In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85803 --- Caipora wrote: > Something's bothered me since the first book, and > I hope someone has an answer. > > One of the puzzles was pure logic, the potions. > Reading that, it took paper, pencil and fifteen > minutes to see that the clues were consistent, and > a bit longer to see that they were incomplete. The > text didn't have enough clues. There had to be a > diagram showing the heights of the bottles (or the > shapes, I don't have the book here). > > This is probably a point settled long ago, but what > gives? Did the British edition have a diagram cut > in the American? Did she intentionally give a > puzzle without giving the reader enough clues? > Was it a mistake? Possibly it was unintentional. When I read it, I thought it was a rather effective device to put the reader in Harry's position. The incomplete clues make the puzzle more confusing, as it was to Harry. Because Harry is stumped by the problem, he does not observe where the "dwarf" and "giant" stand in line. Hermione, of course, does look at all of the relevant clues, and is able to solve the puzzle. Incidentally, if you assume that the puzzle is soluble -- i.e., that the given clues plus a look at the bottle sizes disambiguates the solution -- you can deduce that the "backward" potion must be in the last place on the right, and that the "forward" potion must be either the third or fourth in line, whichever is the dwarf or the giant. That's reasonably complete, and close enough to convince me that Rowling probably had checked the puzzle and simply chose to leave out a description of the heights. If she had not checked it, I doubt that she would have arrived, by chance, at a soluble puzzle. -- Matt From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Tue Nov 25 00:04:18 2003 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 00:04:18 -0000 Subject: Just Pass Me By (filk) In-Reply-To: <410-2200311124201634568@earthlink.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85804 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Gail Bohacek" wrote: > > In my continuing endeavor to see every single Beatles song filked with a Harry Potter theme I need all the help I can get. I don't even pretend that I can do it all by myself. Just Pass Me By (OOP, Chap. 16) To the tune of Don't Pass Me By, by the Beatles (a group we never pass by/bypass) Hear a MIDI at: http://www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Palladium/9083/white.htm Dedicated to that extremely enchanting Philadelphia woman who has made The Beatles and HP filking virtually synonymous THE SCENE: The Hog's Head Inn. HARRY, expecting only a handful of student inquiries concerning Hermione's proposed extra-curricular DADA classes, is flummoxed when over two dozen fellow students enter. HARRY (to Hermione): Just look at all those students Coming through the door Look at all those students You said three or four CHORUS OF STUDENTS Waiting for your lecture In this run-down bar We must hear it How you came to be the hero that you are HARRY I hear the students asking How I saved myself It was not my doing I had lots of help CHORUS OF STUDENTS But whenever there was a fight You won and kept your health You must teach us How you came to be the hero with the scar HARRY Just pass me by, I'm not your guy, I can't teach you Though I know Umbridge hasn't got a clue Dark Arts Defense is too intense The hurdles are so immense Just pass me by, I'm not your guy, I can't teach you CHORUS OF STUDENTS Although some may have doubted you Your skills are so rare You flew against dragons Snakes slew in dark lairs. We think it would be great If you were our tutor And maybe we'll learn with Herm to say That scary name "Voldemort." Don't pass us up, no "ifs" or "buts," don't drop the ball 'Cause you know, Harry, we would learn it all We merely seek to once a week Enhance defensive spell techniques Don't pass us up, no "ifs" or "buts"...... - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm P.s. Our next update (look for it in three or four days from now) will be humungous in terms of quality: not only will it include our third complete Beatles album, it will also include Salazar's full- length OOP musical The Order based on the film version of Chicago (Salazar also sent us three different filks set to the Major- General's song from G & S's Pirates of the Carribean, oops, I mean Penzance, as well as Draco's musical exile to Middle Earth), *and* a culling of all of HPF's Christmas Carols, suitable for all non- amphibian-bearing choirs (this is Rowling, not Aristophanes!) - CMC From absen99 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 00:28:06 2003 From: absen99 at yahoo.com (absen99) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 00:28:06 -0000 Subject: Neville's broken nose In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85805 > Erin: > No ideas, just another question: What about foriegn wizards with > accents like Fleur and Victor Krum? Surely they pronounce spells > differently from the English wizards? I believe that this issue deals with the skill of the Wizard in question. The weaker the Wizard the more they depend on the spoken version of the spell/hex. The spoken words are probably useful to help Wizards focus their concentration and energy. Wizards like Dumbledore and Lord Voldemort on the other hand often do not even speak their spells. Just look at their duel at the end of OotP. [Voldemort raised his wand and sent another jet of green light at Dumbledore, who turned and was gone in a whirling of his clock; next second he had reappeared behind Voldemort and waved his wand at the remnants of the fountain; the other statues sprang to life too.] ? OotP Pg. 813 US Concerning foreign Wizards, many of the HP spells have their roots in Latin, which is very convenient because then all Wizards can use these words. For example, Krum or any other foreign Wizard would still say Lumos to ignite their wand. The word itself isn't English but rather the Latin word for Light. The same for Nox, which is Latin for Darkness. As far as the DE who couldn't speak or even Harry underwater (in GoF), speaking the spells even though no words came out probably still allowed them to hear the words in their "minds eye" if nothing else. This allowed for at least a partial effect. Neville, being very unskilled probably would desperately need to speak the spell properly out load for it to have any effect. Also note that Neville's failed attempts after his broken nose were also hampered by not using his own wand (it was Hermione's). Absen From orionus2 at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 23:51:05 2003 From: orionus2 at yahoo.com (Aurelius Orionus) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 15:51:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills (was Howgarts Clubs - Art, Music, and Chess). Message-ID: <20031124235105.60815.qmail@web41014.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85806 > Geoff: > Speaking as someone who was sufficiently good many > years ago to hold down a board position in my College > team, I find it difficult to see how someone can > reconstruct the game in PS from the sketchy evidence > provided. Only on about six occasions does the > narrative refer to a specific move and, often, the > move is vaguely described. Then we have comments that > Ron darted round the board fending off white's > attacks or that several pieces were taken. I don't > think even my logic could put together the game. Relatively new member to the forum, and this thread caught my eye also, probably because I am somewhat interested in chess and as a fan of Ron and chess-playing!Ron, I was shocked to read all this mumbo-jumbo about him being horrible when in the books he is clearly made out to be a very good chessplayer. I agree with your assessment that there is very little in PS that could be pieced together. Actually the narative in PS makes it sound like Ron kicks a bit of butt. As you mentioned above, he was down a lot of pieces and decided to go around and clean up a bit, which doesn't happen much in chess. :) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/ From mrsewp at bestweb.net Mon Nov 24 21:50:05 2003 From: mrsewp at bestweb.net (Elizabeth W. Philipbar) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:50:05 EST Subject: Fwd: Re: [HPforGrownups] Hagrid a spy? Message-ID: <3fc27d0d.1c58.0@bestweb.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85807 >>Marylandman says, and I snip a bit: >What if Hagrid on his way back from seeing the giants gets separated from Madame Maxine (which we already knew since Sirius tells us this)on the way back. LV through his contacts with the giants captures Hagrid and puts him under the Imperius Curse and then lets him go to spy on the DD and the Order. It would not be the first time that LV has used Hagrid to his advantage. Who else better to use then one of the most trusted people to both Harry and DD? This would also go along with the idea that it is someone close to Harry. This would also benifit LV if he wants to attack the school. He could come through the Forbidden Forest. And, who knows the forest better than just about anyone? That's right Hagrid..>\ ephilipbar replies: I don't think Hagrid could be the spy based upon the clear documentation in canon about his feelings for Dumbledore, "great man Dumbledore" starting with his virulent reaction to Mr Dursley's slight about Harry's new school and its headmaster. This would be too much of a radical departure of character. Now Narcissa Malfoy, of whom we know little, other than that she loves her son.... Where has LV "used Hagrid to his advantage?" Unless you mean as the scapegoat for Tom Riddle and Aragog? Later in OOP when "professor" Umbridge and her flunkeys come to sack Hagrid, several of them throw curses every which way, none of them seem to have any effect. Hermione even comments how this must be due to Hagrid's giant/ mixed blood. I have a hard time believing even LV would be able to throw the Imperius. Although, hey, nothing is impossible. Lastly, LV himself skulked in the Forbidden Forest as VoldeQuirrel on the prowl for the stray unicorn.. and he spent all that time in Albania. He probably would be able to get in and out without Hagrid. Especially considering the centaurs would not knowingly interfere with humans/ wizards. Thanks for thought-provoking post; I will be looking forward to hearing other views... Liz From syndicateblue at yahoo.com Mon Nov 24 21:50:53 2003 From: syndicateblue at yahoo.com (syndicateblue) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 21:50:53 -0000 Subject: Luna Lovegood and the Grey Lady In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85808 Louis Badalament: > Does anybody here remember the Grey Lady? She's supposed to be the > Ravenclaw ghost. The thing is, I got to thinking, and I decided I > could see a scenario take place. If Luna Lovegood is truly as much > a part of Harry Potter's team as Hermione and Ron is (as the ending > of Order of the Phoenix would seem to suggest) then what might > happen somewhere in Book Six is this: Luna, one day, leads her > Gryffindor friends to the Ravenclaw common room, for whatever > reason. There, they meet the Grey Lady of Ravenclaw House who > could, potentially, play an important role in the future of the > plot. Or she could be what she's been so far - an incidental > character; nonetheless, I think this would be a good place to meet > for Harry to meet the Lady properly. What do you all think? I personally find the Bloody Baron to more intriguing and more likely to play an important role in book 6 or 7. There is repetition throughout the series in mentioning several unusual things about the Baron: that he is covered in silver blood, that he rarely talks, and that he is the only being in the castle that is able to control Peeves. Things that are repeated in this fashion should clue you in that they are "loose ends" that will eventually be tied up, whether or not they are imortant. The Grey Lady, on the other hand, seems to be just an incidental character to me. Syndicateblue. From kate_bag at hotmail.com Mon Nov 24 22:50:26 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 22:50:26 -0000 Subject: Neville's broken nose In-Reply-To: <3FC27B32.5050304@cantab.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85809 > Angel adds: > There's two interesting points to add to this. The first is in > Flitwick's first lesson, where he cautions that students should > pronounce things properly, citing a wizard that didn't. The second is > the spell that Dolohov uses on Hermione, wordlessly. These two instances > seem to be slightly contradictory. > Any ideas? > I believe the stronger and more trained the wizard, the less the incantations are needed. Take Dumbledore, for example...if I'm not mistaken, there are not many occasions that we see Dumbledore perform magic *with* incantations; he usually performs his magic soundlessly (a good example is his "excape" from the aurors in OoP - just a bunch of cracks are heard, no spellcasting). In this same scene, Kingsley also simply *whispers* the incantation to modify Marietta's memory, and to my mind, a whisper is a very indecipherable thing where syllabic emphasis is concerned. There are many, many more examples of magic without incantations being performed, through all of the novels (note, however, that a wand is *always* present, incantation or none). I really don't know if any of this makes sense to you...I am still unsure of most of it. But I do think that the difficulty of the spell might also have something to do with it...if I recall correctly, Harry says that had the Death Eater been able to say the incantation to the spell with which Hermione is hit at the end of OoP, it would have caused much more damage. ~Kate From lmbolland at earthlink.net Tue Nov 25 01:17:02 2003 From: lmbolland at earthlink.net (goodnight_moon5) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 01:17:02 -0000 Subject: Animagi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85810 Huntergreen wrote: AS for the animagus form, now that's a little more complicated since we don't know anything about that process except that its very complicated. It is very different than a patronus form, however, because a patronus reflects something that a witch/wizard finds comforting or warm, and a animagus form reflects the witch/wizard themself... Sirius is a dog, which must be because of his loyalty and bravery, perhaps some sort of territoriality that he has... Forgive the snipping. I believe Sirius' animagus form is JKR's death clue, and it would have been a huge hint if we had been paying attention, LOL. The "grim" - a spectral black dog - is a portent of death in British folklore, everyone knows. In Yorkshire the dog is known as The Padfoot. IMHO, the moment she introduces us to animagus Sirius Black aka The Padfoot (who is in Every Way the black dog - from his animagis form to his given name, and we could even speculate about his nickname "snuffles" which means "to blubber or sniffle while crying") she's dropping huge hints that he's going to die. *snuffle, sniff, blubber* After all, SHE knew full well she'd kill him off after three books, even if we didn't catch all her "death clues." Lauri From amani at charter.net Tue Nov 25 01:29:58 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 20:29:58 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Luna Lovegood and the Grey Lady References: Message-ID: <017901c3b2f3$a3ce28e0$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85811 Syndicateblue. I personally find the Bloody Baron to more intriguing and more likely to play an important role in book 6 or 7. There is repetition throughout the series in mentioning several unusual things about the Baron: that he is covered in silver blood, that he rarely talks, and that he is the only being in the castle that is able to control Peeves. Taryn: I do agree that we'll learn more about the Bloody Baron (he's got too many interesting characteristics not to learn more about him) but I hear a lot about the "silver blood" covering him and just wanted to note that we don't really know WHAT color it is. As ghosts themselves are silver, the blood is as well, and it could have been any color before he died. (There've been some discussions about it being unicorn blood, but it seems just as likely to be human blood or any other type of blood.) ---------- Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From idcre at imap2.asu.edu Tue Nov 25 02:18:01 2003 From: idcre at imap2.asu.edu (backstagemystic) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 02:18:01 -0000 Subject: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85812 Syndicateblue wrote: < No: HPFGUIDX 85813 I'm not sure if this has been brought up already, but anyway. Neville knows more than a) he lets on most of the time and b) he himself knows. He's clearly had a memort charm worked on him. This is fairly widely accepted, yeah? JKR certainly isn't being too subtle on this point. Neville has a terrible memory and as we learn in GoF, people who have had extensive memory charms worked on them (Bertha Jorkins for instance) generally sustain damage to their memory in general. So for some reason, someone decided that Neville knew too much and wiped some of his memories. But even so, I just re-read OotP and got the distinct feeling that Neville knew more about what was going on than the others. When Harry goes to take the prophecy, Neville doesn't hesitate or say he thinks it's a bad idea like Hermione does. Instead he snaps suddenly, "No, dont!", while looking tense and stressed out. Conclusion: Neville knows something about the prophecy. During the following fight with the death eaters, it is also Neville who is most vocal about keeping the prophecy away from the Death Eaters. "Whatever you do, don't give it to them!" The others don't seem to care nearly as much, because the others, unlike Neville, don't know what's at stake. Okay, it's a bit of a stretch, but I think it has some merit. Neville also knows that its the LeStranges who tortured his parents without being told. Which makes me wonder how much more he knows about the Death Eaters and their trials...particularly Snape. Grasping at straws, Laik From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Tue Nov 25 02:00:33 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 02:00:33 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville's broken nose In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FC2B7C1.5030104@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85814 absen99 wrote: > > As far as the DE who couldn't speak or even Harry underwater (in > GoF), speaking the spells even though no words came out probably > still allowed them to hear the words in their "minds eye" if nothing > else. This allowed for at least a partial effect. Neville, being > very unskilled probably would desperately need to speak the spell > properly out load for it to have any effect. Also note that > Neville's failed attempts after his broken nose were also hampered by > not using his own wand (it was Hermione's). Actually, I think this is where the wand comes in. Had Neville had the right wand, then I'm not sure that he wouldn't have been OK with the broken nose and spell casting. I have a feeling that his father's wand may have acted as a limiter on him, Narrowing the channel through which magic can pass, nbecause it isn't focused precisely on the source of the power, but slightly skewed. Therefore his mouth acts as an additional filter for magical energy, far less focused than a wand would be, but the best substitute available. It explains in part why Neville would struggle in potions. It's like someone who has the wrong glasses on, and then has another filter to correct it, but that filter isn't very good and only allows the individual to see the right words with a lot of strain. Take away the glasses, and the individual is screwed. Because he's used to compensating with his mouth, far more power comes from there than would normally, which would explain why he can melt cauldrons. It might also explain why he can deal with plants so well. Plants are relaxing, potions aren't. If someone is making you nervous, and you're stammering, then the focus is going to go wrong, and in Neville this is disastrous. AotN From TanzGabu at hotmail.com Mon Nov 24 22:38:31 2003 From: TanzGabu at hotmail.com (tanzgabu) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 22:38:31 -0000 Subject: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85815 ... Also, in line with all of these speculations which I whole heartedly agree with (Except for maybe the Snape loves Lily thing.. I'm really sorry, it just seems a little bit overdramatic. Like a soap opera maybe. But who knows! It could certainly be true) Snape also thought that Black was a murderer and the such. Well, he's been around many of those, and surely when they're caught they try to make up excuses to get off don't they? Along with all of these other emotional things, Snape *might possibly* have had some logic working, at least beforehand, that Sirius and Lupin might try to weasel their way out of the situation. So he probably came into the shrieking shack already ready to not listen to anything they said. If he had made a habit out of believing every murderers story, where would he be now? He doesn't really come off as a trusting person, so... I think if most of us had been in the position, even without all of the emotional entanglements he has, that we wouldn't believe the story they were putting forward. It would seem like some desperate attempt to go free. And what fool would buy into a killer's story? Certainly not Snape, in his mind. Anyway, that's just my take on part of it. You all have already perfectly described the ethos, so I thought maybe I could wedge in a little logos. =P -tanz From stevejjen at earthlink.net Tue Nov 25 03:15:25 2003 From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 03:15:25 -0000 Subject: Neville - the boy who knew too much. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85816 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "laikokae" wrote: > Neville knows more than a) he lets on most of the time and b) he > himself knows. > > He's clearly had a memort charm worked on him. This is fairly widely > accepted, yeah? JKR certainly isn't being too subtle on this point. > But even so, I just re-read OotP and got the distinct feeling that > Neville knew more about what was going on than the others. > > When Harry goes to take the prophecy, Neville doesn't hesitate or > say he thinks it's a bad idea like Hermione does. Instead he snaps > suddenly, "No, dont!", while looking tense and stressed out. > Conclusion: Neville knows something about the prophecy. Jen R.: I just re-read this scene last night and was also struck by how quickly and firmly Neville tells Harry not to lift the Prophecy-- it's out of character for him, although less so in OOTP with his added confidence. Still, I wondered why he protested in the scene, and attributed it intuition rather than logic. Like you said, he could be responding to a partially repressed memory with no concious reason why. Laik: > Neville also knows that its the LeStranges who tortured his parents > without being told. Which makes me wonder how much more he knows > about the Death Eaters and their trials...particularly Snape. Jen R.: The knowledge about the Lestranges (and perhaps DE's in general) comes from Gran, I think. As we saw in St. Mungos she is very open about what happened to Neville's parents: "Well it's nothing to be ashamed of...You should be *proud*, Neville, *proud*" and then: "My son and his wife...were tortured into insanity by You- Know-Who's followers." (US, chap. 23, p. 514). Gran doesn't say who tortured them there, but if she is this outgoing and verbal, Neville has probably heard the story of his parents in great detail. Gran doesn't strike me as someone who would tiptoe around important issues. That's a good theory re: the Prophecy though--Neville seems to innately know it's important and must be saved at all costs. Maybe Neville and his parents will provide some of the answers we're hoping for in Book 6! Jen Reese, who very much hopes the Longbottoms recover before the end of the series and reunite with Neville (sniff). From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 03:19:50 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 03:19:50 -0000 Subject: Unsealing the Chamber (Was Ponderables...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85817 > Constance Vigilance wrote: > > Actually, I say that [that Harry reopened rather than unsealed the Chamber of Secrets]. The way I read it, Tom unsealed the chamber > each time. 713 is correct in pointing out that there is no discussion > about resealing the chamber, but we don't really know what all Tom > Riddle did in his last year at Hogwarts. However, Tom did come back > to Hogwarts as Tom!Diary and therefore would be able to fulfill the > requirement that only Slytherin's heir would be able to unseal the > chamber. He used Ginny's body to do it, but the true heir (Tom) did > the actual unsealing. The purpose of the unsealing, as stated in the > legend, was to purge the school of those who were unworthy**. Diary! > Tom was well underway to do that until he got distracted with the > alternate goal of defeating Harry. > > But, like 713 says, I think that any parselmouth could have entered > the bathroom and opened the Chamber, after it had been unsealed. > > > ** If the goal of unsealing the chamber is to purge the school of > those unworthy, then that would provide a motivation for Lucius to > ensure that the heir of Slytherin (Diary!Tom) was back in Hogwarts. > Which would explain why he sent the diary to Hogwarts. Sending it > with Ginny was an unexpected opportunity to discredit Arthur. Thanks for an interesting and very thorough explanation of why Harry is able to open the Chamber of Secrets without being the Heir of Sytherin. I confess that the distinction between opening and unsealing never occurred to me, but it makes perfect sense now that you mention it. I do have another question for you to tackle, though. How did Lucius happen to have Tom Riddle's diary in his possession? (I'm sure he wouldn't have trusted Draco to find it for him--I doubt that Draco even knows about the Riddle/Voldemort connection. BTW, I still haven't read any wholly convincing explanations of how Voldemort got his wand back.) Carol From RSFJenny19 at aol.com Tue Nov 25 03:43:01 2003 From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (Jenny) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 03:43:01 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Bill Weasley is Ever So Evil parts 1 & 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85818 Runny eggs again, Jenny thought distastefully, as she eyed her breakfast in the Royal George Tavern. Every time she came in, things never seemed to turn out the way she liked them. That was the risk of this place, she thought ruefully, one never knew what to expect. Abandoning her eggs, Jenny stood up, nursing her second cup of coffee and noticed suddenly that the tavern was sporting a new banner, one that appeared to be warning people of something. Curious, she made her way over to see what could have caused such a fuss in the BAY. "BB GUN, eh?" Jenny noted aloud, catching the attention of a redhead at the bar as she did so, and she watched the woman head eagerly her way. The woman looked familiar, Jenny was sure, and she wondered absently what vessel she had seen her aboard. She glanced once again at the banner, then at the woman who approached her. "You must be Erin," Jenny said with a smile and a tinge of regret in her eyes for what she was about to say next. "Interesting theory, BB GUN, but no gun can fire without every piece working properly. Your canon is interesting, and the sneakoscope almost had me convinced, until I realized what didn't fit with ESE! Bill." As Erin eyed her warily, Jenny took a deep breath and plunged in with, "if Bill is evil, why didn't he tell Voldemort that only Voldemort or Harry could retrieve the prophecy? "Dumbledore told Harry that *we*, not *he*, had known all along what Voldemort didn't learn of until Rookwood informed him(1), meaning that the Order, not just Dumbledore, knew this. And if Bill knew this, why would he have not informed Voldemort? With Rookwood being a former Dept. of Mysteries worker and a Death Eater, the Order would have no cause to believe that someone in the Order had passed along that information when it clearly could have come from Rookwood. "Furthermore," she continued blithly, "Rookwood may have waited so long to tell Voldemort because he may have been out of the loop, but Bill, through the Order, was very aware of Voldemort's plans, and were he a loyal DE, surely he would have told Voldemort this crucial information." Jenny watched Erin curiously, waiting to see what she thought of this. Thanks, Erin, it's nice to get my feet wet again in the BAY :) ~RSFJenny~ "Imagine wasting your time and energy persecuting merpeople when there are little toerags like Kreacher on the loose -" -Sirius Black http://www.geocities.com/rsfjenny/HP ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Canon: 1) "And then you saw Rookwood, who worked in the Department of Mysteries before his arrest, telling Voldemort what we had known all along - that the prophecies held in the Ministry of Magic are heavily protected. (OOP, Ch 37, p.829US) ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 04:16:52 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 04:16:52 -0000 Subject: Penelope Clearwater (Was Challenging Lexicon timeline) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85819 > KathyK: > In CoS, after Hermione and Penelope Clearwater were petrified > McGonagall postponed all Quidditch, and the teams were unable to > finish the year. I know this post was originally about quidditch, but I want to go off on another track. I'd forgotten that Penelope Clearwater, Percy's girlfriend, was petrified in CS. Surely that makes two grudges Percy ought to hold against Tom Riddle, the other being that TR possessed and tried to murder his little sister. Percy *must* know, based on what Ginny was able or willing to tell her family about her experience, that Diary!Tom was a previous incarnation of Voldemort, and yet he seems to want to believe that Voldemort was destroyed in that encounter, along with the diary and the "memory" of Tom--at least until the end of O0P, where things take a different turn and even Fudge is forced to acknowledge Voldemort's return. But unless Percy really believed that destroying Diary!Tom destroyed Voldemort, or that the memory of Voldemort's former self had no connection with his present existence, his going along with Fudge in dismissing Harry's story of Voldemort's return--a position he held throughout OoP until the final scenes at which he isn't present--is inexplicable no matter how ambitious (and hurt and angry) he is. I'm not switching quite yet from my view that he's deluded rather than under an Imperius curse (I still see his behavior as a consequence of combined ambition, mortification, and pride), but the grudge he ought to hold against YTR/Voldemort *is* creating some nagging doubts in my mind. To return to Penny, she may not know that Ginny was possessed, but she certainly knows that Ginny was taken into the Chamber of Secrets and almost killed. I'm also holding out the hope that she'll somehow convince Percy to talk to Ginny about what happened to her, especially since what happened in the DoM will make it impossible for him to deny Voldemort's return. I don't think that would be enough to make him humble himself and beg his family's forgiveness, but it would at least remind him that he really loves them and put him on the right side in the battle. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 04:29:42 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 04:29:42 -0000 Subject: Rabastan - name meaning In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85820 Steve wrote: > The name is Rabastan, as many of you have pointed out. I fixed the > typo on the Azkaban page. > > > > The site I find most credible on matters like this is the Akashic > Record. They list Rabastan as: > > 'Probable corruption of Rastaban, a star whose name means "head of > the snake".' > > That sounds right to me. First of all, so many of the people in the > Black family have names from stars. Second, that particular star > seems to fit a scummy Death Eater, just like Sirius fits Sirius, the > dog animagus. > Steve Vander Ark > The Harry Potter Lexicon Except for one small problem: Unlike Draco, whose mother was a Black and therefore fits the Black family pattern of having been named after a constellation even though his surname is Malfoy, Rabastan is the brother-in-law of a Black, but that's his closest connection. His brother Rodolphus married Bellatrix Black. Their mother, as far as we know, wasn't a Black--at least she doesn't seem to have appeared on the chart--so possibly the Lestranges are a French line of the pure bloods. And correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that there's no star or constellation called Rodolphus. Carol From catlady at wicca.net Tue Nov 25 04:33:15 2003 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 04:33:15 -0000 Subject: Sirius / Severus / Neville / TMR's diary and LV's wand / Penelope Clearwat Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85821 I still believe that Sirius's "someplace warm!" hiding place was in the Caribbean (maybe a Muggle-proof island in the Bermuda Triangle -- Hi, Amura! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85640 ) and the bright-colored tropical birds who carried his mail were probably macaws. Sure, macaws live on the mainland rather than the islands, but Harry's mail is carried by a snowy owl, and snowy owls don't live in Britain. Lauri Goodknight-Moon wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85810 : << I believe Sirius' animagus form is JKR's death clue, and it would have been a huge hint if we had been paying attention, LOL. The "grim" - a spectral black dog - is a portent of death in British folklore, everyone knows. In Yorkshire the dog is known as The Padfoot. IMHO, the moment she introduces us to animagus Sirius Black aka The Padfoot (snip) she's dropping huge hints that he's going to die. >> Yes, but she is ALSO demonstrating his canine personality; she can do multiple things with the same symbol. Eloise wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85798 : << I'm sure he's suffering now because, despite all his taunts, *Sirius* is the one who died the hero's death whilst he, ironically, was the one who had to stay hidden away and couldn't take part on the show-down at the MOM. >> Oh, yes, while Severus is surely getting on everyone's nerves by reciting how nice it is to rid of Sirius, and giving them a back- handed compliment by saying how fortunate that it was Sirius who was killed rather than someone not quite so useless, still Sevvie is suffering terribly from frustration because no one else rises to his bait in the satisfactory way that Sirius did, and he gets no visible sign of the pain he gives them. Of the grown-ups, Remus is hurt most by these taunts but Molly is the one least good at concealing her feelings ... Laik Okae wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85813 : << Neville also knows that its the LeStranges who tortured his parents without being told. Which makes me wonder how much more he knows about the Death Eaters and their trials...particularly Snape. >> And Jen Reese replied in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85816 : << The knowledge about the Lestranges (and perhaps DE's in general) comes from Gran, I think. As we saw in St. Mungos she is very open about what happened to Neville's parents: >> In addition, don't all Neville's friends now know what happened to his parents because they read the summaries of the escaped Death Eaters's crime on the front page of the Daily Prophet? Gran probably didn't tell Neville anything about Snape (she trusts Dumbledore, and Dumbledore trusts Snape, QED) and the Daily Prophet didn't tell about Snape. Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85817 : << How did Lucius happen to have Tom Riddle's diary in his possession? >> I think that both Tom Riddle's diary and Tom Riddle's father's ancestral home were both in Lucius's collection of 'Lord Voldemort's old school things'. I think that Lucius accumulated that collection while he was serving LV in the previous Reign of Terror, at LV's instructions, and probably with LV giving him some things to hold onto. I don't think TMR left the diary at the school (even if it might have been logical to leave it where it was to be used), but instead left it with his other school days possessions at the home of one of the 'useful friends' he said he had made at Hogwarts (which I imagine to have been Lucius's father or older brother), a 'useful friend' who supported him while he studied Dark Arts and gave him money to travel. << I still haven't read any wholly convincing explanations of how Voldemort got his wand back.) >> I accept the theory that LV brought Pettigrew along with him when he went to kill the Potters, and Pettigrew grabbed up LV's wand before fleeing from the disaster. Then he either had LV's wand with him through all the years of rat-hood, or he hid it somewhere where he went to retrieve it before going to Albania. Carol wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85819 : << To return to Penny, she may not know that Ginny was possessed, but she certainly knows that Ginny was taken into the Chamber of Secrets and almost killed. I'm also holding out the hope that she'll somehow convince Percy to talk to Ginny about what happened to her, >> Percy may have broken up with Penny. Possibly because one of his bosses (Crouch Sr or Fudge) let him know that marrying a Muggle-born was not a good career move. Possibly because Percy and Penny quarrelled over whether to believe DD that LV was back or to believe Fudge, or if she was outraged at him sending back his mother's Weasley sweater and ordered him to go to Molly and apologize... From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 05:09:55 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 05:09:55 -0000 Subject: Theory on the DADA-post's jinx In-Reply-To: <000901c3b0dd$293e8510$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85822 >Carol: > > I wasn't thinking of his [Snape's] DE past, which I agree wouldn't be a > > detriment to someone with his intelligence. My concern is that there > > don't seem to be many careers available in the WW other than teaching, > > reporting, owning a store, or working for the MoM. He could be an > > auror, of course, but where would he find a position that was worthy > > of all that knowledge? Would an auror have ause for potions? So what I > > meant was, where other than the MoM could he go to use all that > > knowledge and subtle intelligence? St. Mungo's, maybe? Anyone for > > Snape as a healer? Kathryn: > He could set up as an apothecary for a start. I almost guarantee Madam > Pomfrey doesn't make the potions she uses in her work any more than a doctor > in a hospital makes the medication he prescribes. If he sold mainly to > places like St Mungos it would limit the amount of time he had to spend > dealing with people. He could even set up with a partner (assuming he could > find someone who wanted to work with him - *raises hand hopefully* ) so > the partner handled the customers and the finances and he made and invented > potions all the time. I suspect that would suit him down to the ground. Carol: I like that. Snape could be to potions what Ollivander is to wands. Remember the powerful sensation Harry felt in entering Ollivander's shop of "some secret magic" permeating "the very dust and silence" (SS Am. ed. 82)? I imagine Snape's apothecary shop would have an equally magical atmosphere, but less "prickly" and more intense, subtly aromatic and darkly poetic like "the softly simmering cauldron with its shimmering fumes" whose beauty too few students appreciate (SS 137). I still think Snape really wants the DADA post, but I'm glad he has alternatives other than the MoM, which is much too mundane for our subtle and gifted Master of Potions. Carol From erinellii at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 05:16:22 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 05:16:22 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Bill Weasley is Ever So Evil parts 1 & 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85823 Erin and Oliver are walking arm and arm along the bright but chilly winter shore of Theory Bay, proudly clutching their new BB GUNS (Bitter Bill Goes Undeniably Nefarious) under their arms and screaming random PARTY LINE (Principled Altruistic Righteous Teacher: Yummy Lupin Is Not Evil) slogans at the tops of their lungs. In the end, Erin reflects as she watches the ships out in the bay gliding along under the early morning sun, there can be only one. "LUPIN COULD HAVE LET HARRY RUN THROUGH THE ARCH!" Oliver shouts. "BUT HE SAVED HIM INSTEAD!" chimes in Erin. One ESE traitor in the Order of the Phoenix.... Though in the past she'd been a rather quiet PARTY LINE supporter, Erin's Evil!Bill Weasley theory must now make her an implacable foe to ESE!Lupin. She shudders ever so slightly at the thought. No mere mortal is likely to relish tangling with the likes of Pippin. And those ships out in the bay remind her of something, too.... Erin dimly recalls promising Abigail yesterday afternoon on the Imperius! Arthur trimaran that she'd return from her shore leave no later than midnight. And here it was, nearly ten in the morning. Oh, well, Abigail always slept in on weekdays, so perhaps Erin wouldn't be missed yet. After a few minutes of these gloomy thoughts, Erin turns to Oliver. "So what is it you wanted to tell me about Snape?" she asks. "That was what you wanted to come out here for, right?" "I have a new idea, and I hated to just throw it down in front of George, seeing as he is a Snape Theory and all," says Oliver. "It was actually you who made me think about it." he continues. "Remember that we were speaking of how teenage Distressed! Bill was feeling drawn more and more to this mysterious Head of Slytherin, the Potions or DADA teacher before Snape? Bill starts to think that the triumph of Voldemort is inevitable; just like Peter, he reckons the Dark Lord is taking over everywhere. "And then suddenly everything changed: Voldemort vanished, his mentor died or was sent to Azkaban and a new teacher arrived at Hogwarts." Olivier says. Horribly embarrassed, Erin stops dead in her tracks. "Ah, jeez," she mumbles, her face going even redder than her hair, "I meant to mention this earlier, but I was just so caught up in getting the Evil! Bill theory out there...." her voice trails off miserably. "Go on," urges Oliver, "tell me whatever it is you want to tell me." "Well, there's no easy way to say this, so I'll just go on and say it," says Erin, dragging her toe through the sand as she avoids Oliver's gaze. "While I absolutely, unconditionally LOVE the idea of the Death Eater Slytherin teacher before Snape mentoring ESE!Bill, I'm afraid there's just no canon for it. It makes sense to me on all levels, but I'm afraid that if I leave it in there, people might start throwing yellow flags at it, and it could even weaken BB GUN. So I can't include it in the official BB GUN theory." Oliver quietly looks at the shiny new BB GUN in his hands for a few moments. Fearing that he is perhaps contemplating tossing it into the ocean, Erin says sorrowfully, "I'm sorry, Oliver. I should have told you sooner." At last Oliver looks over at her. "But the Slytherin Head of House left right before Snape got there. Surely that's suspicious. He's got to be dead or in Azkaban as a Voldemort supporter, doesn't he?" "It is highly suggestive." admits Erin. "But there was a war going on. Many, many people were killed, on both sides. The Slytherin Head could even have been fighting for Dumbledore. I know, I know," she says as Oliver opens his mouth to protest, "It's not likely. And I like your version so much better. But it's just not enough." Oliver digests that for a minute, and then says pleadingly, "All right, but I don't think leaving out the evil Slytherin Head takes too much away from my new theory." He continues elaborating it: "How much does Teenage!Bill know about his new teacher Snape? I would say a lot, as he is a very clever boy and his father works at the ministry, so my bet is he knows everything about the DE trials. Plus we have evidence from Sirius in GoF that these trials have profoundly affected the Wizarding World," "Yes," Erin breaks in, "This is really the horror of the traitor in the Order. Because even if Bill didn't know all that stuff back then, he definitely knows it now. As well as the details of what steps Snape is currently taking to spy for the Order. Bill sits in on all the meetings. He knows everything." Oliver goes on, "So Bill knows that Snape was a Death Eater and that Dumbledore has vouched for him. And Snape, being the astute, ready- minded man we know immediately suspects this Gryffindor who seems to hang around with Slytherins most of his time." ********************************* "Bill doesn't like him either," said Ginny, as though that settled the matter." *********************************OoP, Ch. 4 "It fits beautifully in the picture, doesn't it? And thats why Snape never stays after the meetings, not because it does not want to see Sirius- quite the contrary in fact, he enjoys taunting him whenever he can- but because he's too suspicious of Bill." Erin waits silently for a while then mutters, "This is turning a bit scary. The woes of Mrs. Weasley have not yet come to an end, I'm afraid. This could very well be true. Snape has a history of not going to Dumbledore with his suspicions. Remember how in PS/SS he tried to deal with Quirrell himself? And the whole shrieking shack fiasco? Snape could just be waiting to deal with Bill on his own, which could turn out badly for Bill" "And I like it also because it brings up another parallel. That of Dumbledore and Riddle. Just as DD was the only one who suspected Riddle, Snape is the only one who suspects Bill. And he might therefore even be the only one Bill fears, because Bill suspects that Snape suspects. Thus the "Bill doesn't like him either" quote." "Tell ya what, Oliver, this one makes it in under the "possibles" section of the theory." "Maybe," says Olivier, "we could pay a visit to some less tragic part of the Bay one of these days. An Imperio'd!Arthur killing one of his own children in front of Bill, thereby turning him to the Dark Side, it is a bit too sadistic for me. I was already devastated by Sirius' death, see. Besides, it is not like ESE!Bill is already stalking the Bay, trying to silence or discredit us BB GUN bearers." Just then Erin and Oliver hear a loud *pop* from behind them. Erin starts. "Listen, Oliver," she hisses, clutching his arm. "I need to warn you, since you're new here. Be very careful what you say. You never know what you might conjure up." "What, Fillicidal!Arthur?" asks Oliver, confused. "Well, if you don't realize what you just said, I'm certainly not going to repeat it for you. And I don't actually necessarily believe in Fillicidal Arthur or the Missing Weasley Child, you know. But I shall insist upon Imperio'd!Arthur as the parent of Evil!Bill at all costs." "Let's go back to the Royal George for another drink," Oliver suggests. "My throat is parched after all that PARTY LINE shouting." "We could even continue talking about Snape there if you like," Erin tells him. "I don't think George will care. He's only really concerned with why Snape joined the Death Eaters and why he left. But, Oliver, now that I get a good look at you in the sunlight, are you sure you're old enough to drink?" --Erin TBAY posts referenced in this post: ESE!Bill parts 1 and 2: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85610 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85729 Imperius!Arthur: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/40168 Imperius!Arthur post-OOP: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/77654 From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Tue Nov 25 07:11:26 2003 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 07:11:26 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's animus toward the Potters/the prophecy (was Replay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85824 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote: > > > Kathy: > > "Merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit.." Does > > anyone believe Dumbledore couldn't have killed Tom if he wanted > >to? > > > > Erin: > > Actually, yes. I believe that had Dumbledore attempted to AK > Voldemort, he would have failed through some circumstance he could > not have forseen. Much as Voldemort failed when attempting to kill > Harry as a baby. I'm not saying that Voldemort's mother's love > would have saved him, of course. But something would have happened > to prevent Dumbledore, and it might have been every bit as > disastrous for DD as the failed AK was for Voldy. > Actually, I think Dumbledore couldn't AK Tom, for reasons due to the very nature of an Unforgivable curse. Per Bella, a few pages before their duel, we are told this: "Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you boy?... You need to *mean* them, Potter! You need to really want to cause pain - to enjoy it - righteous anger won't hurt me for long -" Note that she is talking about the whole category of Unforgivables, not just Crucio. By extension, it seems reasonable to assume that to AK someone you need to really want the other person to die, and not just because you are justifiably angry at them. He'd need the type of hate and loathing where he wouId actually *enjoy* his death, and I don't really see that coming from Dumbledore. Anyone notice that the way the Unforgivables work seems fairly similar to the way a Patronus works, only on the other end of the spectrum? And having said that, I'm now going to have to think about what the other two spells needed to properly mirror the unforgivables would be... --Arcum From Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com Tue Nov 25 08:16:09 2003 From: Arcum_Dagsson at celticwind.zzn.com (arcum42) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:16:09 -0000 Subject: Sirius / Severus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85825 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > Eloise wrote in > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85798 : > > << I'm sure he's suffering now because, despite all his taunts, > *Sirius* is the one who died the hero's death whilst he, ironically, > was the one who had to stay hidden away and couldn't take part on the > show-down at the MOM. >> > > Oh, yes, while Severus is surely getting on everyone's nerves by > reciting how nice it is to rid of Sirius, and giving them a back- > handed compliment by saying how fortunate that it was Sirius who was > killed rather than someone not quite so useless, still Sevvie is > suffering terribly from frustration because no one else rises to his > bait in the satisfactory way that Sirius did, and he gets no visible > sign of the pain he gives them. Of the grown-ups, Remus is hurt most > by these taunts but Molly is the one least good at concealing her > feelings ... > Actually, I don't think Snape will be talking about how nice it was to get rid of Sirius, any more then he does about James. I honestly don't think Snape really wants to think about the "typically Griffindor pointless heroic death" that either James or Sirius suffered too much, though I have no doubt that he'll use Sirius, like James, as a bad example. I honestly suspect he wants to die in a splendidly heroic death himself, subconciously, and resents the two of them for getting there first... --Arcum From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 08:53:32 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 08:53:32 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills In-Reply-To: <20031124235105.60815.qmail@web41014.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85826 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Aurelius Orionus wrote: > Aurelius O.: > > ... I am somewhat interested in chess and as a fan of Ron and... > the books he is clearly made out to be a very good chessplayer. > > ... very little in PS that could be pieced together. ... narative > ... makes it sound like Ron kicks a bit of butt. As you mentioned > above, he was down a lot of pieces and decided to go around and > clean up a bit, which doesn't happen much in chess. :) > > Aurelius bboy_mn: I agree, the series repeated references to Ron playing chess always show him winning, although we don't really see him up against a challenging opponent most of the time, but clearly the impression is that Ron is a good chess player. Against McGonagall's chess set there are only a few references to specific move and even they are generalized. The bulk of the game is contained mostly in one paragraph which paints a picture of Ron doing an outstanding job considering he had to do most of the work himself. And, as someone else pointed out, Ron had two chess pieces (Harry & Hermoione) that he had to guard at all cost, as well as trying to overpower his opponent. That substantially complicated the chess game. As far as your reference to Ron being down a lot of pieces then going around and cleaning up a bit; all that tells me is that Ron went from play a defensive game to playing an offensive game. He suddenly realized that to win, he had to go on the attack. I played a little chess when I was younger, and my biggest failing was that I always played a defensive game; I was alway reacting to the other players moves and letting him control the direction of the game. To win, to some extent, a play has to have a aggressive killer instinct. You have to dominate the board and force the game to be played on your own terms. That's what I see Ron doing; switching his strategy from reactive to proactive. That certainly is a strategic move by a player with a grasp of the game and the immediate situation. So, again, I agree, the book continually re-enforces the postion that Ron is a good chess player, and we have no reason to suspect otherwise. I'm convinced that somehow Ron's chess playing ability is going to become significant in the books again, although, I confess, I can't imagine how. bboy_mn From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk Tue Nov 25 09:18:10 2003 From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:18:10 -0000 Subject: Sirius / Severus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85827 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arcum42" wrote: >> > Oh, yes, while Severus is surely getting on everyone's nerves by > > reciting how nice it is to rid of Sirius, and giving them a back- > > handed compliment by saying how fortunate that it was Sirius who was > > killed rather than someone not quite so useless, still Sevvie is > > suffering terribly from frustration because no one else rises to his > > bait in the satisfactory way that Sirius did, and he gets no visible > > sign of the pain he gives them. Of the grown-ups, Remus is hurt most > > by these taunts but Molly is the one least good at concealing her > > feelings ... > > > Arcum: > Actually, I don't think Snape will be talking about how nice > it was to get rid of Sirius, any more then he does about James. > I honestly don't think Snape really wants to think about the > "typically Griffindor pointless heroic death" that either James or > Sirius suffered too much, though I have no doubt that he'll use > Sirius, like James, as a bad example. I honestly suspect he wants to > die in a splendidly heroic death himself, subconciously, and resents > the two of them for getting there first... > > --Arcum June: I agree about him not gloating. Where's the evidence for Snape gloating about people being dead? Secondly, he might well be jubilant privately about Sirius - and in his place, I might well feel the same, but I do not look for public gloating. To some extent, he might even feel slightly bereaved by the loss of a good enemy. No one left to take it all out on. No one left to really cut a few snide comments on. Lupin isn't the same kind of target - he won't rise, so that wraps it up for MWPP as something for Snape to vent some of his feelings on. I don't agree with the concept of him wanting to die a splendidly heroic death. "Oh, let me die - and then they'll all be sorry!", or "Death will redeem me at last!". I think Snape wants to live the same way as the rest of us usually do. I have no idea what his post LV fall agenda might be and will not even attempt to conjecture. What I do believe is there are issues in his past that drive him on (and yes, I''ll come blatantly out of the closet and say the issue is female, it had red hair and went by the name of Lily;-)). I don't believe this particular Dante is seeking an early death so that he can be reunited with his lost Beatrice either. But I think like many people with interior problems (a crap childhood, a frightful adolescence, a dark past, a lot of guilt) he may be hoping for a fairly redemptive conclusion to those aspects of his life. He may never have sat and thought through precisely what form his life will take when the all-consuming goal of redemption/revenge is achieved. Most similarly driven people don't. That doesn't mean he doesn't want to live. But he may well accepted the fact that he may well not survive the final outcome of the struggle. That is different from wanting to die. This is not a happy guy - accepted. A guy who's making an unconscious appointment with death? No. Of course we just don't know enough about the character because we see him from a Harry- centric point of view - which means that many of all the adults' true motivations are just not revealed (and of course JKR has good reasons for this - and we can also have a lot of fun mulling it all over too). So perhaps he IS a subconscious suicide in the making. I just don't believe that myself. June From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Tue Nov 25 09:42:54 2003 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 09:42:54 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills In-Reply-To: <20031124235105.60815.qmail@web41014.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85828 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Aurelius Orionus wrote: > > Geoff: > > Speaking as someone who was sufficiently good many > > years ago to hold down a board position in my > College > > team, I find it difficult to see how someone can > > reconstruct the game in PS from the sketchy evidence > > > provided. Only on about six occasions does the > > narrative refer to a specific move and, often, the > > move is vaguely described. Then we have comments > that > > Ron darted round the board fending off white's > > attacks or that several pieces were taken. I don't > > think even my logic could put together the game. > > Relatively new member to the forum, and this thread > caught my eye also, probably because I am somewhat > interested in chess and as a fan of Ron and > chess-playing!Ron, I was shocked to read all this > mumbo-jumbo about him being horrible when in the books > he is clearly made out to be a very good chessplayer. > > I agree with your assessment that there is very little > in PS that could be pieced together. Actually the > narative in PS makes it sound like Ron kicks a bit of > butt. As you mentioned above, he was down a lot of > pieces and decided to go around and clean up a bit, > which doesn't happen much in chess. :) > > I am the one who said for the first time that Ron could be a bad chess-player. But I think I was not clear enough. What I meant is that if we are trying to take literally the little indications we have about the game, we can deduce that both players seem to play, not necessarily badly, but at least highly unusually. On the other hand, I firmly believe that JKR intended Ron to be a superb chess player. Two possible explanations are : 1) Wizard chess is different from ordinary chess (the one I favor based on canon). 2) JKR did not try to describe an actual game (and that is perfectly ok with me). Once again I would be happy to share chess evidence with anyone interested, but off- list as it is not about HP anymore in my mind. Be sure I did not mean the books are supposed to give us the impression Ron is bad. And thanks to Geoff for pointing me a false assumption in my line of reasoning. Olivier From penapart_elf at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 10:29:21 2003 From: penapart_elf at yahoo.com (Penapart Elf) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 02:29:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: ADMIN: OotP Chapter Discussions - schedule + call for volunteers Message-ID: <20031125102921.26795.qmail@web13008.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85829 Greetings! On behalf of the Admin Team, I would like to direct your attention to the recently updated schedule for OotP Chapter Discussions available in the database section here. If you are not yet familiar with the bi- weekly discussions, please see post #67817. The database also gives the post numbers of all OotP chapter summaries/questions posted thus far. Just to provide some background: the chapter discussions began in July, went on hiatus in August, and have since restarted. If you are interested in leading a chapter discussion, please write to me at penapart_elf @ yahoo.com (minus the extra spaces, of course) and let me know whether you are interested in volunteering for leading the discussion of a particular chapter/week *or* in joining a reserve of volunteers who will be notified whenever needs for volunteers arise. To find out which chapters already have discussion leaders, please see the above mentioned database. Currently I am seeking a volunteer for ch. 7 scheduled for the week of Dec. 8th. As always, if you should have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me or the elves in general at hpforgrownups-owner @ yahoogroups.com (without the extra spaces). :) Penapart Elf __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/ From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 25 11:44:29 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 11:44:29 -0000 Subject: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ul In-Reply-To: <172.228ecbc2.2cf3d57b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85830 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, eloiseherisson at a... wrote: > > Poor Severus. I shall be devastated if JKR kills him off, but I'd rather he > died heroically than go through the whole of the series never quite achieving > that which he so desperately needs, never proving to himself his own worth. > Fear not, Eloise! JKR didn't invest an incredible amount of time and effort creating a character with the subtle complexities of ole Snapey for no good reason. He's not going to be discarded like an old sock, don't you worry. I have long held a theory about Sevvy (posted ad nauseam, but that won't stop me mentioning it again) and more recently a bit of lateral thinking that could add extra spice to the story. Briefly, the theory is that Snape has a personal grudge (motive - family) against Voldemort. Revenge is his game, to the exclusion of everything else. The members of the Order are not his natural allies; he belongs with Malfoy et al, being nasty. So why has he joined with DD against his natural inclinations? And how can DD be so sure that he can be trusted and that he will not flinch come the crunch? Only an overwhelming and understandable lust for revenge can explain it, IMO. Of course in this scenario Sevvy will probably go down in flames, but with a Bang! not a whimper. The other bit of theorising is a "what if?" thought. What if DD meets his Balrog (to quote Pippin) in the next book? Who takes over the running of the Order? Who probably knows more about DD's plans than anyone else? Who has been bringing him information and has been responding to his requests and orders? Who is plenty smart enough to have figured out exactly what is going on? Our Sevvy, naturally. ("You know what to do...." said DD at the end of GoF) Oh, there will be those who will claim that Harry should lead the fight, but he doesn't *know* the things that matter (mostly DD's fault) and neither does anyone else - except, probably, Snapey. So if DD drops off the perch expect much angst and conflict in the Order, and outside it from Harry, as, after a period of anguish and pain, Severus Snape takes charge. What a lip-smacking thought. Kneasy From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Tue Nov 25 11:54:14 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 11:54:14 -0000 Subject: Ravenclaw Mascot-Challenging Lexicon Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85831 I searched the archives and unbelievable cannot find anything on this. I see on the Lexicon that Ravenclaw's house mascot is listed as the Eagle and not a Raven. I am searching for canon to confirm the true mascot of the House. Does anyone have any references they can point me towards that I am missing and not recalling? Arya From astrid at netspace.net.au Tue Nov 25 12:59:04 2003 From: astrid at netspace.net.au (Astrid Wootton) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 23:59:04 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville's broken nose In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85832 On 25/11/03 4:51 AM, "sylviablundell2001" wrote: Sylvia says > Neville's broken nose had the effect of making him mis-pronounce his > words, the spell coming out as "Stubefy!" It was thus ineffective. If > a wizard had a natural speech defect, a lisp, for example, or an > inability to pronounce the letter "r", would this also affect his > ability to cast spells? Would he have to undergo elocution lessons? > Or could it be put right by a simple spell? > Sylvia (just curious) > Astrid says > This way lies chaos: every distinct *accent* could complicate the spell! The > range of accents in the UK alone is considerable, and if you add in the > enormous range of Spoken English around the English Speaking world the > complexity of the problem (were uniformity attempted) far exceeds the > desirable practices of voice coaches! > > However it does appear that the *quality of thought* is a key determinate of a > spell.(You really have to *mean* the Cruciatus curse, before it works > properly: (Bellatrix to Harry OOP UKHN p7i5) > > Perhaps it was not merely the hypo nasality caused by the broken nose that > made Neville?s ?stubefy? inoperative, but the pain and confusion which took > the edge off his concentration. > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > ADVERTISEMENT > > b/S=1707544108:HM/EXP=1069782692/A=1853618/R=0/*http://www.netflix.com/Default > ?mqso=60178338&partid=4116732> > > ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ > > Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! > http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin > > Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts > to which you're replying! > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service > . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Tue Nov 25 13:14:43 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 13:14:43 -0000 Subject: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ul In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85833 Kneasy wrote: > The other bit of theorising is a "what if?" thought. > > What if DD meets his Balrog (to quote Pippin) in the next book? > Who takes over the running of the Order? > Who probably knows more about DD's plans than anyone else? > Who has been bringing him information and has been responding > to his requests and orders? > Who is plenty smart enough to have figured out exactly what is > going on? > Our Sevvy, naturally. > ("You know what to do...." said DD at the end of GoF) > > Oh, there will be those who will claim that Harry should lead the > fight, but he doesn't *know* the things that matter (mostly DD's > fault) and neither does anyone else - except, probably, Snapey. Now Siriusly Snapey Susan: Why, Kneasy! Why couldn't it be Minerva McGonagall? She is the person who took over at Hogwarts when DD was briefly ousted in CoS; she was right there when DD had to leave again in OoP. She is a member of the Order, she has been responding to his requests & orders for years, she is "bloody brilliant" [per Ron Weasley :-)], and I would argue that she knows as much of DD's plans as Severus does. I'm not arguing w/ the idea of Snape as a possible successor, but I do find it extremely interesting that Snape and *Harry* are the only two possibilities you put forth, essentially ignoring McGonagall. What gives? Siriusly Snapey Susan From jeffl1965 at hotpop.com Tue Nov 25 13:46:18 2003 From: jeffl1965 at hotpop.com (jeffl1965) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 13:46:18 -0000 Subject: Neville - the boy who knew too much. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85834 I agree with the statements. I only wanted to add that I think that Neville will be very important in the final battle. I just did a post on another list where I asked if anyone thought that Neville could be the one that either takes over from a wounded Harry and kills Riddle, or that he stands with Harry to defeat Riddle. There does seem to be more about Neville than was hinted, and I'd love to see him finally prove himself and make his Gran proud. :) But I had also wondered, could Ron finally make a stand as well, and show that he's more than we think ? Jeff From eowynn_24 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 14:03:26 2003 From: eowynn_24 at yahoo.com (eowynn_24) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 06:03:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Third Man in the Graveyard? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031125140326.35971.qmail@web60210.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85835 gehring13 wrote: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" wrote: >> The text of OOP doesn't really tell us who killed Sirius. It occurs >> to me that we don't know who killed Cedric either. >> So maybe, just maybe, there is another Death Eater present, out >> of Harry's field of view, which JKR tells us several times is very >> limited. ---------- >It was Wormtail that killed Cedric. He was carrying Voldemort and >Voldemort told him to "Kill the spare." >Likewise, Sirius' cousin Bellatrix Lestrange killed Sirius. They >were dueling on the dais in the Death Chamber and he paused to >say "You can do better than that" and she hit him with the spell. >Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I've just re-read books 4 & 5 for >the 4th time. >-Kathy --------- Now me Eowynn: OOP pg 805 US edition; 'Only one pair were still battling, apparently unaware of the new arrival..." Come on,you can do better than that!" he yelled, his voice echoing around the cavernous room. The second jet of light hit him squarely on the chest... Harry released Neville, though he was unaware of doing so. He was jumping down the steps again, pulling out his wand, as Dumbledore turned to the dias too..." Now I need to go and look at GoF and the graveyard scene again, but I have thought about this scene several times. I do not believe that Bellatrix was the one that cast the spell killing Sirius ( I have an idea who). If you are in a fight with someone you are ducking and dodging blows, you never have your chest squared up to your opponent it is off to one side or another, protected. The blow that hit Sirius was dead on. I believe that there is someone else down by the duo and it was 'them' that cast the spell. No one else would know since they were all busy and didn't turn to look until after it had happened, and Harry was running toward the veil. Now if it wasn't Bellatrix her scream could be one not of triumph, but anger/fear. She wanted to kill Harry, and got denied,then she wanted to kill Sirius and was denied that as well, plus they had just failed to recover the orb that their lord sent them after. She is the only one to escape, and she gets to endure the wrath of Voldemort on her own, I think I would be screaming to. Those are just my thoughts, and I will have to get back to you about who killed Cedric IMO. Eowynn ( who has turned into a bit of a lurker.) --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From quigonginger at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 14:33:09 2003 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:33:09 -0000 Subject: Ravenclaw Mascot-Challenging Lexicon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85836 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Arya" wrote: > I searched the archives and unbelievable cannot find anything on this. > > I see on the Lexicon that Ravenclaw's house mascot is listed as the Eagle > and not a Raven. I am searching for canon to confirm the true mascot of the > House. Does anyone have any references they can point me towards that I > am missing and not recalling? > > Arya Ginger chimes in: I know there are others in the previous books, but having just reread OoP, the first one that popped into my head was on p. 683 US, right before the Ravenclaw/Gryffindor match. "Luna Lovegood overtook them with what appeared to be a live eagle perched on top of her head." Ooh! Another one popped in! SS US paperback p.34 describes the Hogwarts seal as having "a lion, an eagle, a badger, and a snake surrounding a large letter H." I'm sure some eagle eyes out there will come up with more. Happy Thanksgiving to all who are celebrating it this week, Ginger From quigonginger at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 14:40:28 2003 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:40:28 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85837 As I am not a chess player, I cannot add anything substantial to that part of the discussion (sorry), but one thing has bugged me since my first reading of SS. As Steve pointed out: > And, as someone else pointed out, Ron had two chess pieces (Harry & > Hermoione) that he had to guard at all cost, as well as trying to > overpower his opponent. That substantially complicated the chess game. So I wonder: What would Ron have done had it been necessary to sacrifice Harry or Hermione? I have been looking for clues in the other books as to Ron's charactor, and have not come to a solid conclusion. I am thinking of a situation where it had to be done not only to secure a victory, but also to avoid imminent defeat. No time for stalling. Now or never. Opinions? Ginger, who would like to take this opportunity to wish the Detroit Lions best of luck in our most revered game of the year. From christianrooster at hotmail.com Tue Nov 25 15:00:03 2003 From: christianrooster at hotmail.com (Mark) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 15:00:03 -0000 Subject: Ravenclaw Mascot-Challenging Lexicon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85838 Arya mentioned: > I see on the Lexicon that Ravenclaw's house mascot is listed > as the Eagle and not a Raven. I think you got confused by the name. Note that the mascot of Griffindor is the Lion, and not a Griffin (which has the head of an eagle and the body of a lion). But it still makes sense: Griffindor is known for bravery, as the lion. While a Raven is a bird like an Eagle and usually "soars" (reference to intellectual persuits). Though both are also scavengers, so I don't know how that'd fit. Mark From tim_regan82 at hotmail.com Tue Nov 25 15:09:13 2003 From: tim_regan82 at hotmail.com (Tim Regan) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 15:09:13 -0000 Subject: The Muggletonians Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85839 Hi All, I've just been listening to the first episode of The Long Road, a BBC Radio 4 series tracing how historic events have shaped the British view of the relationship between God and man. One of the movements mentioned is The Muggletonians: http://www.exlibris.org/nonconform/engdis/muggleton.html I cannot see anything that would make one think that Muggletonian is the root of the term Muggle (in JKR's subconscious), but it seemed worth posting. Here's a quote: Lodowicke Muggleton preached the concept that God took no "immediate notice" of his creation. This led to the general belief that such things as prayer, worship, or overt acts of religious faith such as martyrdom were without purpose and unnecessary. Cheers, Dumbledad. PS The programme's online at http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/religion/rams/long_search.ram From margdean at erols.com Tue Nov 25 15:44:23 2003 From: margdean at erols.com (Margaret Dean) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:44:23 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ravenclaw Mascot-Challenging Lexicon References: Message-ID: <3FC378D7.DAC7B2CB@erols.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85840 Mark wrote: > > Arya mentioned: > > I see on the Lexicon that Ravenclaw's house mascot is listed > > as the Eagle and not a Raven. > > I think you got confused by the name. Note that the mascot of > Griffindor is the Lion, and not a Griffin (which has the head of an > eagle and the body of a lion). > > But it still makes sense: Griffindor is known for bravery, as the > lion. While a Raven is a bird like an Eagle and usually "soars" > (reference to intellectual persuits). Though both are also > scavengers, so I don't know how that'd fit. Rowling may have wanted to avoid the negative connotations of the raven, but IMHO it would be a better mascot than the eagle for the "intellectual" house; the raven is one of the most intelligent birds out there. --Margaret Dean From belijako at online.no Tue Nov 25 15:39:36 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 15:39:36 -0000 Subject: Neville's broken nose In-Reply-To: <3FC27B32.5050304@cantab.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85841 Angel wrote: > There's two interesting points to add to this. The first is in > Flitwick's first lesson, where he cautions that students should > pronounce things properly, citing a wizard that didn't. The second is > the spell that Dolohov uses on Hermione, wordlessly. These two instances > seem to be slightly contradictory. > Any ideas? Me: It doesn't necessarily have to be contradictory. I got the impression that if Dolohov could have uttered his spell out loud, the spell would have been much more powerful. The only reason Hermione didn't die, was because Dolohov's words were silenced... Just look at the damage the spell caused: Hermione had to take ten (?) different potions to heal, and she was sore all over (some broken ribs as well?), she also passed out cold when hit. A powerful spell (hm; maybe the same one that hit Sirius; the difference being Bellatrix could say the words out loud...). So I would think that a powerful wizard who either mispronounces the spell's wording or is silenced, can still make something happen, but the spell is "weaker", less effective. Neville is still just a kid and not as skilled and powerful as Dolohov. Also, if I remember correctly; a skilled wizard can even do magic without his wand...(I think Snape among others has said so). Berit From melclaros at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 16:07:33 2003 From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:07:33 -0000 Subject: Sirius / Severus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85842 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "junediamanti" wrote: > > I don't agree with the concept of him wanting to die a splendidly > heroic death. "Oh, let me die - and then they'll all be sorry!", > or "Death will redeem me at last!". I think Snape wants to live the > same way as the rest of us usually do. I have no idea what his post > LV fall agenda might be and will not even attempt to conjecture. I don't think HE knows. I stand by my belief that whatever is driving Severus in whatever direction he's going in is strictly and deeply personal. I don't go in for the LOLLIPOPS idea, but for those of you that do it just sweetens the pot. I think that the only thing on Snape's agenda is vengeance at any price and that the thought of which "side" he's on is secondary at most. Severus is on Severus' side, plain and simple. He's got something he needs done and he'll do what it takes to see it through. THEN he'll plan his retirememt. If there is one. That, I believe may be rather far down his list of priorities as well--again--vengeance at any cost. Mel--who hopes there is a retirement. From belijako at online.no Tue Nov 25 16:08:39 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:08:39 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's animus toward the Potters/the prophecy (was Replay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85843 Kneazy wrote: > > 2. A man, now also a woman, distinguished by the performance of > extraordinarily brave or noble deeds; an illustrious warrior > DD doesn't want the Dementors as allies because he can't *trust* > them. ("Voldemort can offer them so much more" is the phrase he > uses.) He tells Voldy that there are things worse than death and this > is what he threatens Voldy with. Doesn't sound compassionate to me. > Yes, there are things he won't do. But, to coin a phrase, just because > you won't stab someone in the back, it doesn't mean you won't kill > them face to face in a fair fight. DD may be moral, but he wants > Voldy destroyed. Voldy kills for no good reason, he enjoys inflicting > pain and suffering. To say that the person who kills him is sinking to > his level is to equate surgery with sadism. Me: I agree with your definition of what a hero is, Kneazy: "A man, now also a woman, distinguished by the performance of extraordinarily brave or noble deeds; an illustrious warrior." I'm just saying it's possible to be a hero performing brave and noble deeds without resorting to the means of the enemy. We can see the making of a hero in Harry: His almost reckless willingness to risk his own life for his friends. I just don't think, having gotten a "feeling" of Rowling's standpoint through Dumbledore's and Hermione's words, that that involves Harry spending the next two years learning how to MEAN the cruciatus curse and the avada kedavra. As Bellatrix said; in order for these unforgivable curses to work properly, one has to really MEAN them. And I for one does not want a hero that has to "mean"/become evil in order to fight evil. There's a really good reason these three curses are classified as unforgivable... You also mention how Gandhi and Mandela are hardly heroes, among other things because they were not as noble and "pure" in their intentions/actions etc. as one would wish, and I'm sure a lot of history books have "bypassed" some of the truth. But I'm not saying a hero has to be perfect. Harry isn't. He has already done the grave mistake of attempting to use one of the unforgivable curses (against Bellatrix in MoM). But hopefully he'll grow, mature and make the right decisions in life... By the way; I can see that it's hard to argue for a totally pacifist view when you're faced with characters like Hitler and Voldemort... I'm just seeing the problems with such a course of action (not saying it shouldn't be done in extreme cases). The problem is killing doesn't just eliminate the enemy; it does something to the killer's psyche. And that's what I am worried about. Yesterday evening I watched a documentary (sorry, don't know who has produced it) on the effect of war on the mind of the soldiers. Soldiers from all over the world were interviewed (British soldiers fighting at the Falkland Islands, American Vietnam veterans, Israeli soldiers fighting the Syrians etc.). And everyone told the same thing: How being forced to kill significantly changed something inside them. They described in their own words, how killing produced hatred and a view of their enemy as animals. Some of them even confessed they started liking killing... And these guys were just ordinary, "good" guys. They were all affected by the killings. In the few instances where the soldiers first thought the enemy was fellow allies and then later had to kill them when they understood they were hostile, they experienced major emotional trauma afterwards (and even psychological breakdowns). Because they suddenly realised they had killed a human being, not just a "rodent". Voldemort might not classify as a human being any longer, I can see that (though it looks like Dumbledore does; calling him "Tom"...:-) But, I am glad Harry was prevented from killing Peter in the shrieking shack... For his own well-being. Berit From melclaros at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 16:22:53 2003 From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:22:53 -0000 Subject: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ul In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85844 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > I have long held a theory about Sevvy (posted ad nauseam, but that > > Briefly, the theory is that Snape has a personal grudge (motive - family) > against Voldemort. Revenge is his game, to the exclusion of everything > else. The members of the Order are not his natural allies; he belongs > with Malfoy et al, being nasty. So why has he joined with DD against his > natural inclinations? And how can DD be so sure that he can be trusted > and that he will not flinch come the crunch? Only an overwhelming and > understandable lust for revenge can explain it, IMO. Me: My pet theory as well. The Order is a means to an end to him, just as, I surmize, were the Death Eaters in an earlier stage of his life-- or so he thought. A personal grudge (and we know he's an expert at picking at scabs) against *someone* or *something* could explain why someone as self-motivated as Severus would not only join the DE's but turn on them as well. They no longer suited his needs, or worse, betrayed him. kneasy: > Of course in this scenario Sevvy will probably go down in flames, but > with a Bang! not a whimper. Me: Noooooo! BUT, if he goes down it'd damned well better be glorious--no tripping through a curtain. All I can think of is that lisping cartoon who's trademark line was: "Exthit, thtage right!" kneasy: > The other bit of theorising is a "what if?" thought. > > What if DD meets his Balrog (to quote Pippin) in the next book? > Who takes over the running of the Order? > Who probably knows more about DD's plans than anyone else? > Who has been bringing him information and has been responding > to his requests and orders? > Who is plenty smart enough to have figured out exactly what is going on? > Our Sevvy, naturally. > ("You know what to do...." said DD at the end of GoF) me: How delightful. And how he'll HATE it. Except for Lupin, who is, well, unreliable (taking a moment here to snigger for all the times I've heard males explain why we can never have a woman President), and Arthur whos position in the ministry would make him too easy a mark; Severus, being outwardly the least likely candidate, would rise to the top of the pool instantly as DD's right hand at Hogwarts. Ok, left hand. Minerva would be busy with running the school. kneasy: > Oh, there will be those who will claim that Harry should lead the fight, > but he doesn't *know* the things that matter (mostly DD's fault) and > neither does anyone else - except, probably, Snapey. Me: God no, not Harry. JKR is far too good a writer to fall into that fanfic sort of an idea. Besides, with Snape as head honcho, just think of the chafing opportunties at old #12. kneasy: > pain, Severus Snape takes charge. > > What a lip-smacking thought. me: Yes! Uh huh...oh yes. oh sorry...you meant...ok! Mel From wry1352000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 10:08:10 2003 From: wry1352000 at yahoo.com (wry1352000) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:08:10 -0000 Subject: Legilimens and Occlumens and Snape's Reasons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85845 Eloise wrote: > > > I don't believe that he knew Pettigrew was a Death Eater until after the infirmary scene in PoA (when I *hope* that Dumbledore sat him down and gently explained a lot of stuff to him). We are told more than once that Snape has an uncanny knack of putting two and two together. A lot of the time he's right. Sometimes he's very wrong. But he has such conviction that he's right that he's not likely to look readily at alternative explanations, especially from sources he has reason to suspect such as Sirius or Lupin. After OoP, however, I am left wondering a few things. > > If Snape and Dumbledore are such experts at occulomency, I wonder > how between > > them they were not able to divine who was the spy in the Order of > the > > Phoenix. OK, I let Snape off this one, as I assume he was working > deep under cover > > and the members of the OoP didn't know about him. But Dumbledore? > > > > David wrote: > > Interesting questions, which point up how little we know of the > Legilimens and Occlumens spells, since Snape never got very far in > his lessons with Harry. > > We only have a general idea of what Legilimens can accomplish, for a > start, when not resisted by its object. For example, the memories > shown seem to be random, perhaps biased slightly in favour of > unpleasant memories. Scenes from Pettigrew's childhood would not > tell Snape or Dumbledore a great deal. They would have to light on > scenes directly involving the Death Eaters. > > Legilimency does appear to confer an ability to tell if someone is > lying, though how this works isn't clear. We know Occlumency can > counter this, since Voldemort apparently didn't rumble Snape. > > The next question is whether the use of Occlumency can be detected > by the Legilimens. In the hands of the novice Occlumens, yes, > clearly, because we know Snape could tell when Harry was blocking. > However, we know that Snape could spy on Voldemort undetected, which > implies that his Occlumency was so advanced that, not only could he > prevent Voldemort perceiving the truth, but presumably also provide > a stream of suitable memories to make Voldemort think his > Legilimency was succeeding. Whether this was done by controlling > the flow of true memories to build up a partial picture, or > providing false ones as well, we don't know.... > > > We also don't know the extent to which successful Occlumency opens > up the mind of the Legilimens. Harry managed it with Snape, but > that was using the Protego spell, which clearly gives the game > away. would there have been a risk, supposing Snape tried to read > Moody's mind, or Dumbledore Pettigrew's, of the tables being turned > and sensitive information flowing the other way? > > Then there is the final issue: under what conditions would > Dumbledore and Snape (and the wizarding world generally) consider > the use of Legilimency acceptable? In training, clearly, but then > Dumbledore AFAWK sanctioned the use of Ungorgivable curses for > this. But against a supposed ally? One might suppose that, at the > time of recruitment it would be done. But afterwards? Suppose > Pettigrew genuinely joined the order and was only later 'turned' by > Voldemort - what degree of suspicion would order members feel > justified this form of invasion of privacy? Again, we just don't > know. > Now me (Zinaida): I've also been wondering about these issues, especially about DD's aparent inability to perceive who was the spy in the 1st OtP, and especially considering the facts that Pettigrew "had been passing a lot of information" to Voldemort for a year and DD knew it was someone "close to the Potters" which narrows it down to 3 people. But it didn't occur to me that indeed Snape's being an Occlumence/Legilemens means he should have known who was telling the truth in the Srieking Shack. It seems to me that in order to detect whether someone is telling the truth or not a legilemens doesn't need to use any spell or do anything conspicuous, even to the person in question. For instance, when Voldemort says that Harry is lying about what he sees in the Mirrow of Erised (at the end of PS/SS), he doesn't have to use a wand or say any incantation or do any other conspicuos action - even to Harry (compare it with the effect of the Imperios curse when harry *knows* - feels it, or the legilemens curse: "the office swam in front of his eyes and vanished, image after image was racing through his mind..." (OtP, 534)). Similarly when Voldemort says that Frank Bryce or Pettigrew lie to him in GoF, he also doesn't perform any spell to find it out. I think it very probable that just to detect that one's interlocutor is lying a legilemens doesn't need to do anything at all - he just knows/feels it, but in order to get actual thoughts or memories he/she would have to use the legilemens spell. About when its use is acceptable - it's difficult to say about the use of the legilemens spell, but as for "lie detection" thing, if a legilemens can't help knowing when someone is lying to him/her, then he/she would have no choice. And if by some act of will they could stop themselves from feeling it - something that seems rather doubtful to me - then certainly in the circumstances of war, when a maniacal dictator was taking over and picking off members of the resistance one by one, using one's lie-detecting abilities to detect a traitor would be quite justified - he had the future of all his country at stake, both wizard and muggle, not to mention the members of the order who trusted him! And considering that Pettigrew wasn't much of a wizard by all accounts (e.g., in PoA Prof. McGonagall speaks of his wizarding talents dismissively even when she thinks him a hero and reproaches herself for her impatience with him, and Voldemort also dismisses his talents in comparison with Crouch Jr.'s in GoF) and that Voldemort at least has no trouble figuring out when he is lying (in GoF). Now I recognize that the least some ambiguity in the application of this lie-detecting ability. For example, in PoA DD could have quite logically asked Lupin how he thought Siruis was getting into the castle and if he by any chance knew anything about him that could give them any hints (since they had been so close) and if Lupin had said "no," he would have lied but that doesn't really mean that he was a traitor. (In fact, his behavior even when Harry asks him quite innocently if he had known Sirius, betrays him so much that one doesn't need any special abilities to know that something is not quite right.) But surely, a clever man like DD could devise some thourough enough, leisurly conversation to get some idea. (For instance, in this hypothetical situation, turning the conversation on Harry would have been enough to figure out that Lupin was not a traitor). So how come he wasn't in close enough contact with the members of the small original OtP - considering that he didn't have to subject them to any tests, just talk to them often enough to know? (And how much time he'd have to spend with a person to know such a basic fact as where his/her loyalties lie - considering that V and resistance to him must have been the principal subject matter of all order conversations?) It seems quite unexplainable to me, and my only hope is that JKR couldn't possibly give such a portenous ability to some key characters without thinking it all through. Hopefully, there'll be some sort of explanation later on. About Snape in the Shack - consider how he "teaches" Harry occlumency: "Snape struck before Harry was ready, before Harry had even begun to summon any force of resistance" (534). And that's the first time he tries it! (He also doesn't tell Harry how to resist it till Harry demands that he does, and as soon as Harry manages to reverse it for the first time, he comes back to his attack tactic.) And this is while Snape is perfectly aware of the necessity of Harry's mastering occlumency, and not only for his own sake. It seems that while Snape wasn't purposefully "softening Harry for Voldemort," it's at least partly his fault that Harry felt ill for quite a while after these "lessons" and became easier for Voldemort to penetrate. That is, although he tried to keep balance between his two conflicting "aims," I think in the end fighting back Voldemort took a back seat to the desire to "give Harry a hard time," as Sirius put it. All of this made me think that, perhaps, Snape changed sides in the order's favor not because he realized the danger of a maniac like Voldemort running the country, but because he had some personal grudges against V too? Maybe, he joined him in the first place to get back at James and co. (as well as his pureblood views and dark arts background), but seeing that V. treats his supporters not much better than his enemies, changed sides? In fact, although Harry doesn't make the connection, James and Sirius did to Snape exactly what the Death Eaters did to muggles during the Quidditich match in GoF; maybe V did treat Snape as disdainfully at first as he treated Avery, Pettigrew, and co. (just "a greasy kid"), and Snape decided to take revenge on him. Considering how he always invents opportunities at almost any lesson to get on the nerves of the *son* of the man who tormented him at school, how would he pursue the man himself! This would also explain why DD doesn't trust Snape with the dark arts job. He knows that Snape hates V and so can trust him in general, but isn't sure how the constant contemplation of the dark arts will affect him, since his position seems to be based not on principles or understanding but on personal emotions, and his hatred of Harry is probably almost as strong as his hatred of Voldemort. And coming back to the shark - being a legilemens it's not so much a matter of deciding which sources are trustworthier than others, but just *listening* - which is precisely what Snape positively refuses to do; and although again he can't not understand the implications of making a mistake, getting revenge after all these years is obviously more important. It's not the matter of knowing or not knowing who the DE is - he shuts everybody up, and that's it, as if he doesn't care. No wonder he is described in this scene as "fanatical" and "beoynd reason," with "a mad glint in his eyes." And yet at the end of OtP, in a more unemotional, usual situation (for him), he did go check Harry's information regarding Sirius's whereabouts and safety (or contacted DD about it). However, his position still seems a bit dubious. No wonder JKR said at the Albert Hall meeting that we should watch Snape (approximate quotation - just the general meaning). (Just *why* was there no e-talk this time *after* people were supposed to have read the book - as after the previous books???) I also have a question regarding the thoughts/memories fetch legilemency - can a legilemens choose what he wishes to access or it's random? Because it seems somewhat suspicious to me that *all* Harry's memories that surfaced were of a markedly unpleasant quality (humiliations, fears, or otherwise embarassing), many of them not recent and obviously not what Harry would naturally be thinking about at the moment. Was Snape purposefully extracting a particular kind of memories - acting as a dementor, of sorts - to humiltiate Harry? Sorry for such a long post, Zinaida. From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 16:44:40 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:44:40 -0000 Subject: Importance of Incantations (WAS: Neville's broken nose) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85846 Berit wrote: I got the impression that if Dolohov could have uttered his spell out loud, the spell would have been much more powerful. The only reason Hermione didn't die, was because Dolohov's words were silenced... Now Hermowninny: First, I agree with everything that has been said on this subject. JKR tells us that the spell would have been more powerful if Dolohov were able to use the incantation (can't quote a page, but it's at the end of the book when Harry goes to visit the others in the hospital wing). I just have a thought to add... When Dolohov usses this spell (slashing wand movement with a purple light--I think, sorry, don't have my book) on Hermione, he has been silenced. However, he uses this same spell twice more. Once against Harry (I believe Harry used "Protego" to shield himself) and I believe the second was against Serius? I'm not sure of these details, but they take place about two pages after Hermione is hit. Anyway, my point is that the spell is described exactly the same way each time... slashing wand movement, purple light, etc. Harry even states that it is the same one used on Hermione. Never once does Dolohov utter an incantation with this spell. He has regained his ability to speak when he uses this spell the second and third times, but still no incantation. If the spell is so much more powerful with the incantation, why doesn't he use it? What gives? Hermowninny (who *really* wishes her boss would allow her to keep a spare set of books in her office.) From siriuslove71 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 17:33:58 2003 From: siriuslove71 at yahoo.com (Diana_Sirius_fan) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 17:33:58 -0000 Subject: Unsealing the Chamber (Was Ponderables...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85847 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > , I still haven't > read any wholly convincing explanations of how Voldemort got his wand > back.) > > Carol Maybe if Snape really was at Godric's Hollow the night the Potters were murdered then he returned the wand to Voldie in GOF. Diana From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 18:54:56 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 18:54:56 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85848 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > > Berit: > > ...edited... We can see ... a hero in Harry: His ... willingness to > risk his own life for his friends. I just don't think, ..., that > that involves Harry spending the next two years learning how to MEAN > the cruciatus curse and the avada kedavra. ... And I for one do not > want a hero that has to "mean"/become evil in order to fight evil. > > ... large edit... > > Berit bboy_mn: I couldn't agree with you more. We know both from what we have read about Harry and his actions, and from the prophecy, that '...he (Harry) will (does) have power the Dark Lord knows not...'. Harry already has a power superior to Voldemort, so there is no point in Harry learning to be Voldemort's equal. Voldemort has great ability to tourture and kill, an ability which he uses with casual easy. Why would Harry limit himself to those abilities when he clearly has more? This is the great struggle of Good over Evil, virtue over immorality, the power of love over hate. I really makes no sense for Harry to defeat Voldemort using Voldemort's weapons. I have speculated in the past that, in the end, it will not be a show of raw force on Harry's part that defeats Voldemort, but an act of compassion, of benevolence, mercy, and charity that causes Voldemort to crumble in the face of a power he can never understand. We know that Voldemort must be vanquished, he must be crushed and destroyed. Although it is only implied, I'm not so sure Voldemort/Riddle has to be dead in the standard sense. In the OoP battle at the Ministry of Magic, Dumbledore seems to imply that Voldemort can be destroyed in ways that are far more powerful than death. We have all speculated on what that Harry's power might be. Some say love, other's compassion, but regardless of the specific power, I think it is safe to say that generally, it is the power of something good. Although, I confess I haven't been able to pin it down yet, or figure how it will play out in the final battle. But, I really can't see the whole series ending with Harry saying, 'Bang! You're dead.' I think Harry will defend himself without hesitation and by whatever means necessary, but like all guys who wear white hats, he will not kill his enemy once his enemy has fallen and lays defenseless on the ground. I think in that 'fallen' moment, some act based on this power that Voldemort knows not, Harry will triumph with the pure essense of 'good'. Just a thought. bboy_mn From manawydan at ntlworld.com Tue Nov 25 19:09:57 2003 From: manawydan at ntlworld.com (manawydan) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 19:09:57 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Traitor yet again (Was: Third Man in the Graveyard?) References: <1069705191.29217.52012.m14@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000f01c3b387$b7efaa80$85e76151@f3b7j4> No: HPFGUIDX 85849 Tanya wrote: >The other issue with this, is Snape has such a abrasive personality, and >a good traitor will be one that everyone likes, and the shock factor at the >eventual unveiling. Put it this way, at the stage in the story now, Harry >would be more than happy to find out Snape is a traitor. But I feel that >the identity of the real traitor will be a very unpleasant shock to him. At the beginning of the series, Harry and Snape start with a strong dislike of each other, with Harry convinced that Snape is the bad guy. Ever since, we've seen a process whereby Snape has been depicted as one of the good guys: he's the one who abandoned the DEs and came over to Dumbledore's side, he's the one who's putting himself in danger now for the cause. I wonder, in a poll, how many of us would have Severus at the top of our list of favourite characters? Is all of this a hint that JKR _is_ lining him up to be the traitor in the last book, at the point that Harry has finally come to trust him? I'm not looking forward to it, but I've a nasty feeling that that could well happen (thinking also about some of the remarks that JKR has made about Snape in interviews...) Cheers Ffred O Benryn wleth hyd Luch Reon Cymru yn unfryd gerhyd Wrion Gwret dy Cymry yghymeiri From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Tue Nov 25 19:18:16 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 19:18:16 -0000 Subject: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ul In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85850 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" > Why, Kneasy! Why couldn't it be Minerva McGonagall? She is the > person who took over at Hogwarts when DD was briefly ousted in CoS; > she was right there when DD had to leave again in OoP. She is a > member of the Order, she has been responding to his requests & orders > for years, she is "bloody brilliant" [per Ron Weasley :-)], and I > would argue that she knows as much of DD's plans as Severus does. > > I'm not arguing w/ the idea of Snape as a possible successor, but I > do find it extremely interesting that Snape and *Harry* are the only > two possibilities you put forth, essentially ignoring McGonagall. > What gives? Yes, she took over the school, she is the Deputy Head. She would expect to take over in such circumstances. But to take over the Order? That's a bit different. We don't know just how deeply Minerva is involved in the Order. According to canon, she was not in the 'old' Order and has been mentioned as in the vicinity of Grimmauld Place just once. So, her depth of knowledge re DD's plans are a bit of an unknown. If I read DD's character correctly, he says nuthin' to nobody; this would mean that a state of almost total ignorance applies to all the members except Snape. Snape has information that he has passed on to DD and to no- one else. From the requests he's had from DD on searching out information and the debriefings he's had from DD he must have a pretty good idea the way DD's mind is working. He also understands the DEs and Voldy as well as or better than DD, and from personal experience, too. He seems to know more about Harry than anyone except DD. I don't think McGonagall can match his knowledge and his appreciation of the past or the present in the conflict with Voldy. I'm not claiming she's an incompetent, she's too clever for that, but in an emergency would she be able to offer a fairly smooth transition of leadership, a continuation of DD's plan? I doubt it. DD has kept everybody in the dark but with his extra knowledge Sevvy almost certainly knows more than most, a lot more than many. Snape is starting to look very impressive in the wizarding stakes. Give him another century and I'd match him with DD. He too is an Occlumens and Legimans of some power; he too knows and understands Dark Magic, he is apparently highly motivated and he is a brain. Expect much more from Severus Snape. Kneasy From Angberelius at netscape.net Tue Nov 25 19:10:55 2003 From: Angberelius at netscape.net (Jamie Morin) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 14:10:55 -0500 Subject: there wasn't a wizard who turned who wasn't in Slytherin? Message-ID: <3FC3A93F.7020500@netscape.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85851 > Siriusly Snapey Susan Wrote: > But please keep in mind that it was just *Hagrid* who said, "There > wasn't a witch or wizard who went bad that wasn't in Slytherin" > [paraphrased]. In CoS, JKR says that MORE of the dark wizards came > from Slytherin than from any of the other houses; she doesn't say > they ALL came from Slytherin. > > When I read this statement in CoS last night, I was able to take > Hagrid's SS/PS comment as just a tad bit of hyperbole. Also wanted to point out that in GoF (Hardcover pg. 158 [The Triwizard Tournament] Canadian Edition), its said that, "Harry wondered whether Baddock knew that Slytherin house had turned out more dark witches and wizards than any other." Not sure if thats been mentioned yet, seems clear that every house may produce dark wizards, slytherin just happens to be number one in that area... :) From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 25 19:20:15 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 19:20:15 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85853 > I have speculated in the past that, in the end, it will not be a show > of raw force on Harry's part that defeats Voldemort, but an act of > compassion, of benevolence, mercy, and charity that causes Voldemort > to crumble in the face of a power he can never understand. > > We know that Voldemort must be vanquished, he must be crushed and > destroyed. Although it is only implied, I'm not so sure > Voldemort/Riddle has to be dead in the standard sense. In the OoP > battle at the Ministry of Magic, Dumbledore seems to imply that > Voldemort can be destroyed in ways that are far more powerful than death. > Geoff: This reminds me of LOTR again in which it is said that, if the Great Ring is destroyed, Sauron will fall again and will fall so far that there will be no opportunity of arising again because he transferred so much of his power to the Ring and he will remaina powerless spirit of malice. Perhaps something similar would be a fate worse than death for Voldemort. From dcyasser at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 20:13:56 2003 From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 20:13:56 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85854 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > I have speculated in the past that, in the end, it will not be a show of raw force on Harry's part that defeats Voldemort, but an act of compassion, of benevolence, mercy, and charity that causes Voldemort to crumble in the face of a power he can never understand. > > We know that Voldemort must be vanquished, he must be crushed and > destroyed. Although it is only implied, I'm not so sure > Voldemort/Riddle has to be dead in the standard sense. In the OoP > battle at the Ministry of Magic, Dumbledore seems to imply that > Voldemort can be destroyed in ways that are far more powerful than death. > > We have all speculated on what that Harry's power might be. Some say love, other's compassion, but regardless of the specific power, I > think it is safe to say that generally, it is the power of something good. Although, I confess I haven't been able to pin it down yet, or figure how it will play out in the final battle. But, I really can't see the whole series ending with Harry saying, 'Bang! You're dead.' To add to your thought, I agree I don't see (or want to see)Harry acting as judge,jury and executioner for Voldemort. I could see him being faced with that situation, that standoff, but then I often imagine Harry bringing about Voldemort's end almost unintentionally, accidently, or through a reflexive action, la Dorothy in "The Wizard of Oz." I could easily see Harry reacting to protect a loved one in danger, and, without thinking, throwing the proverbial bucket of water on the Wicked Witch. Granted, Harry's actions would be more about unleashing power than knocking over a bucket, but I could see it as almost a similar accident. Harry acts desperately and out of love, not knowing his actions will vanquish Voldie. I don't generally picture Harry granting mercy on Voldemort, and that being Voldemort's undoing, although it certainly has merit and should be entertained. Must be because I watched the Wizard of Oz this week. :) The one who I think will turn Rambo on us? Professor R.J. Lupin. No more mister nice guy. cheers dc From kkearney at students.miami.edu Tue Nov 25 20:52:36 2003 From: kkearney at students.miami.edu (corinthum) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 20:52:36 -0000 Subject: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives?) In-Reply-To: <134.2852ba96.2cf34c31@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85855 Eloise wondered: > After OoP, however, I am left wondering a few things. > If Snape and Dumbledore are such experts at occulomency, I wonder how between > them they were not able to divine who was the spy in the Order of the > Phoenix. OK, I let Snape off this one, as I assume he was working deep under cover > and the members of the OoP didn't know about him. But Dumbledore? > > But how come Snape didn't suss Crouch!Moody? Was he really so intimidated by > Moody's apparent suspicion of him that he was unable to divine his true > nature? First point, we have been given no indication that Snape is an expert legilimens, only occlumens. The two seem to be completely separate skills. So I don't find it strange that he wasn't able to figure these things out. Now, Dumbledore, on the other hand... First, I don't think legilimency in general is the same thing as the "Legilimens" spell. The latter, as we have seen, causes the recipient to flash through an assortment of memories, and allows the caster to see the same. These memories appear to static, neutral visions, not imparting any information about the situation other than what is seen (Snape doesn't know, as Memory!Harry did, who the dog belonged to, etc.). Legilimency, as Snape describes it earlier, strikes me as an imprecise form of magic, which deals more with abstract thoughts than specific memories. When performing legilimency on another person, one is able to perceive certain emotions, and by correctly interpreting these emotions, is able to determine whether a person is lying, among other things. Like our lie detectors, legilimency is not infallible, especially when the liar knows which emotions to hide. On top of this, the emotions associated with a particular lie are not isolated from a person's other thoughts. The members of the original order were part of a secret, underground organization. Whenever they met, I'm sure several members had to tell various lies to their friends, family, etc. They were all aware that they were involved in a dangerous operation. Many of them had probably been trained for undercover work even if they didn't know Occlumency. Overall, Dumbledore would be trying to find a liar amongst a group of people trying with all their might to keep dozens of lies straight in their minds. Could he really be expected to distinguish Peter's lie from the others? And really, Peter didn't have to do much active lying in Dumbledore's presence. -Corinth From dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu Tue Nov 25 21:05:44 2003 From: dequardo at waisman.wisc.edu (Arya) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 21:05:44 -0000 Subject: Legilimens and Occlumens and Snape's Reasons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85856 Zinaida wrote: > I also have a question regarding the thoughts/memories fetch > legilemency - can a legilemens choose what he wishes to access or > it's random? Because it seems somewhat suspicious to me that *all* > Harry's memories that surfaced were of a markedly unpleasant quality > (humiliations, fears, or otherwise embarassing), many of them not > recent and obviously not what Harry would naturally be thinking about > at the moment. Was Snape purposefully extracting a particular kind > of memories - acting as a dementor, of sorts - to humiltiate > Harry? Arya Now: I wrote a long post about a week ago (#84890) that went through each and every Occlumency lesson and cast that we saw in OotP and proposes that Legilimency is indeed a specific quest to ask for scenes and memories of a specific nature. By this theory, Boggarts (searching for worst fear), Dementors (searching most despairing/traumatic/awful memories), The Mirror of Erised (searching for heart's greatest desire), and even the Sorting Hat (searching for the motives that drives a person to be who they are) are all objects enchanted with Legilimencing abiltiies. Even Dumbledore's use of the Mirror of Erised to couple the Mirror's enchantment with a conditional switching spell with the stone shows further evidence of this, I believe. The link to the previous post is here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/84890 Arya From amani at charter.net Tue Nov 25 21:18:48 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 16:18:48 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Traitor yet again (Was: Third Man in the Graveyard?) References: <1069705191.29217.52012.m14@yahoogroups.com> <000f01c3b387$b7efaa80$85e76151@f3b7j4> Message-ID: <002d01c3b399$b8606880$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85857 Tanya wrote: >The other issue with this, is Snape has such a abrasive personality, and >a good traitor will be one that everyone likes, and the shock factor at the >eventual unveiling. Put it this way, at the stage in the story now, Harry >would be more than happy to find out Snape is a traitor. But I feel that >the identity of the real traitor will be a very unpleasant shock to him. Ffred: At the beginning of the series, Harry and Snape start with a strong dislike of each other, with Harry convinced that Snape is the bad guy. Ever since, we've seen a process whereby Snape has been depicted as one of the good guys: he's the one who abandoned the DEs and came over to Dumbledore's side, he's the one who's putting himself in danger now for the cause. I wonder, in a poll, how many of us would have Severus at the top of our list of favourite characters? Is all of this a hint that JKR _is_ lining him up to be the traitor in the last book, at the point that Harry has finally come to trust him? Taryn: I'm utterly convinced Snape will never be a traitor. This seems far too simplistic for JKR. "Once a bad guy, always a bad guy"? That hardly fits in with her idea of the world being built in shades of grey. What makes Snape so fascinating is that he's a mean person on the good side. It just seems like it would completely refute a point JKR has taken so much trouble to make. (This is another reason why I'm against ESE!Lupin--this just seems to confirm a prejudice. ESE!McGonagall, though... ^_~) I agree with Tanya that the traitor WILL be someone we like--but someone who can turn traitor without confirming a simplistic prejudice as in the case of Snape and Lupin. ---------- Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From abigailnus at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 21:35:22 2003 From: abigailnus at yahoo.com (abigailnus) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 21:35:22 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Bill Weasley is Ever So Evil parts 1 & 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85858 After drinking all those cups of tea, Abigail decides that it might be best to avail herself of George's facilities before continuing to discuss ESE!Bill with Erin. When she returns, however, she finds that Erin has already struck up a conversation with someone else. Wearing a glum expression, Jenny is delivering what she obviously believes is a death blow to ESE!Bill. "If Bill is evil, why didn't he tell Voldemort that only Voldemort or Harry could retrieve the prophecy?" She insists. "Dumbledore told Harry that *we*, not *he*, had known all along what Voldemort didn't learn of until Rookwood informed him(1), meaning that the Order, not just Dumbledore, knew this. And if Bill knew this, why would he have not informed Voldemort?" Before Erin can so much as open her mouth, Abigail jumps in. "It's a pickle, I admit, but I hardly think you should look so upset about it." "Well, on top of everything else, my eggs were runny again." Jenny says ruefully. "Runny eggs? Well, we can't have that." Abigail motions to George over Jenny's head, and ushers her to a table. "George gets a bit overburdened at breakfast time, but he'll have some proper eggs over here soon enough. Now, about this objection of yours, I think I may see a way around it." Jenny looks doubtful. "It all comes down to information, you see." Abigail continues undaunted. "Information and communication are important themes in OOP, and this theme is mirrored not only in Harry's experiences, but in the structure of the two major warring organizations that we encounter in the book - the Death Eaters and the Order. In fact, the readers themselves suffer from lack of information - we learn next to nothing about the Order and it's internal structure." "So, what, you're saying that Bill didn't know the whole truth about the prophecy?" Jenny asks. "I just told you that Dumbledore says 'we'." "But which 'we' is he referring to?" Abigail insists. "Let's look at what we do know about the Order and the war that it's fighting. As those wacky folks in the Safe House keep reminding us, the war between Voldemort and the Wizarding World is primarily a war of spies and intelligence, with the occasional violent flare-up. We know that Voldemort is careful to set his followers up in cells, so that one member can't give the entire organization away. With the introduction of Legilimency in OOP, the need to compartmentalize information becomes even more pressing." "But the Order members clearly know about the prophecy." Jenny points out, as George delivers her eggs fried to perfection. "Why else would they agree to stand guard outside the DoM?" "The membership in general knows about the existence of the prophecy." Abigail admits. "That much is obvious from their reactions to Harry's questions when he first comes to Grimmauld Place, as well as from the twins' deduction that the Order is protecting something important to Voldemort. However, it needn't follow that the entire membership knows who can pick up the prophecy orb. What would be the point of that? Some members clearly need to know these things, but why would Bill? He's a young man, a fairly junior member and a recent recruit, who, by all rights, should have little or no interaction with Harry. There's no justification for giving him such sensitive information." Abigail spears a bit of Jenny's eggs and chews them thoughtfully. "Tell me something, Jenny. Do you believe that the entire membership of the OOP knows about the contents of the prophecy?" Jenny starts to speak, and then pauses. "No. It wouldn't make any sense. The members of the Old Crowd probably heard about it when it was first given, but there's no call to tell the new members about it." "And the same was probably true of the information on the people who could pick it up." Abigail concludes. "Plus, it's not such a stretch to believe that Dumbledore would expect Order members to follow his orders unquestioningly. He does it with Harry, Sirius and Snape in OOP, and in GoF he specifically give McGonagall orders that make no sense, without trying to explain them at all. I wouldn't be surprised if there were members of the Order who only knew that there was something that needed guarding in the DoM, but never even knew what it was." "I don't know." Jenny takes a sip of her coffee. "It seems a little convoluted. Now we have to start discussing who in the Order knew what and when they knew it." "Well, as it so happens, I have another way to beat your objection, although I'm not sure Erin would approve." "Why?" Erin, who had been silent thus far, pipes up suspiciously. "What are you planning to do?" "For starters, I'm going to insist that ESE!Bill is dependent on Imperius!Arthur." "Well, I'm insisting on Imperio'd!Arthur as the parent of Evil!Bill at all costs." Erin informs her. "You are? Oh, how nice." Abigail smiles. "But you might not like this next bit. I'm going to suggest that Bill isn't Evil." "What!" Erin explodes. "After I folded my theory into yours! This is all about that stolen canon, admit it!" "Let me finish!" Abigail tries to calm her. "Bill isn't Evil, by which I mean that he hasn't joined the DEs yet, but he's well on his way. Remember Peter Pettigrew? He was passing information to Voldemort for a year before LV's fall, which indicates that there was a time before that in which he wasn't a spy. His claim that he switched sides because Voldemort was taking over everywhere supports that. Everyone's talking about the modern traitor - well, as you've described ESE!Bill, he isn't a traitor. In order to betray someone you first have to have an allegiance to them - otherwise you're just a spy. You've suggested that Voldemort's resurrection prompted Bill to seek out the DEs. Maybe that hasn't happened yet. Doesn't mean the seeds haven't been sown by, just as the seeds for Peter's betrayal were probably sown years before it happened. At this point, however, Bill has no reason to reveal the crucial information about the prophecy to Voldemort." "Well, what about Percy?" Erin asks. "You were so keen on Bill revealing to Percy that Arthur had been Imperio'd." "He still might have." Abigail replies. "You remember that I wasn't that thrilled with the notion that Spy!Bill's first mission in enemy territory was to subvert the young and impressionably secretary of the MoM to a point of view that he was already well on his way to holding. This way, Bill may have revealed the truth to Percy as a way of purging himself, letting out his frustrations, or he might have been so upset that he said something without noticing that made Percy suspicious. His motives might even have been malicious. Perhaps he was so rattled by Percy's admiration of his father that he decided to knock down Percy's idol." "So Bill isn't Evil, but he's going to be?" Erin wonders. "Isn't that directly opposed to JKR's insistence on free will and the importance of choice? No one can be predestined to be evil in the Potterverse." "Bill the person has free will." Abigail concedes. "But Bill the character goes where JKR tells him. If there is a traitor, then within the Potterverse, if such a place can be said to exist, he or she chose (or will choose) to betray. Outside the Potterverse, however, the choice was never theirs." Abigail gets up, clearly feeling very pleased with herself. "All that talking's made me thirsty. How about it, girls? Is it too early for some TBAY brandy?" Abigail From foxmoth at qnet.com Tue Nov 25 21:43:54 2003 From: foxmoth at qnet.com (pippin_999) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 21:43:54 -0000 Subject: TBAY: What Voldemort knew and when did he know it, was ESE!Bill In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85859 Erin was pondering Jenny's question and Jenny was still wondering where she could get some decent eggs when George came over bearing a silver tray on which rested two elegant black-bordered engraved invitations: ~~ Breakfast at The Safe House~~ Erin picked hers up and examined it closely. "Er--" said George, "I wouldn't do that if -- oops!" In a few moments the two women had left a congealing plate of runny eggs and two little heaps of ash behind them and were strolling up the garden path to The Safe House, where those who ponder the doings of spies and the interweaving nets of conspiracy can always find a dish of eclairs, a change of clothes, or, in this case, a hot breakfast. Sneaky the House Elf ushered them into the kitchen, where a roaring fire blazed, not quite drowing out the soft hum of the newly refurbished MAGIC DISHWASHER. A colorful string of get-well cards festooned the mantlepiece. Seated at the table, sipping from a cup of red liquid, was a dark-haired woman wearing a cape and dark glasses. "Good morning! and welcome," said Pippin. "Just tell Sneaky here what you'd like." "Two eggs, over easy, please," said Erin. "Eggs Benedict," said Jenny. "If it's not too much trouble." "A specialty of the house, Madam," said Sneaky and set to work, wondering if non-Yanks will get the joke, while Jenny repeated what she'd been saying earlier at the Royal George: --------- "if Bill is evil, why didn't he tell Voldemort that only > Voldemort or Harry could retrieve the prophecy? > > "Dumbledore told Harry that *we*, not *he*, had known all along what Voldemort didn't learn of until Rookwood informed him(1), meaning that the Order, not just Dumbledore, knew this. And if Bill knew this, why would he have not informed Voldemort? With Rookwood being a former Dept. of Mysteries worker and a Death Eater, the Order would have no cause to believe that someone in the Order had passed along that information when it clearly could have come from Rookwood." "Oooh, that's a stumper," said Erin. "If there's a traitor in the order, why didn't they tell Voldemort about not being able to get the prophecy?" Pippin smiles. "And how do you know they didn't?" "But Rookwood--" "Yes, yes. But that took place well after Christmas, did it not? Voldemort knew about the mind link by then. So--" Jenny looked thunderstruck. "The Rookwood scene was staged!" "Exactly! The traitor could have told Voldemort as early as the previous August that only LV or Harry could lift the prophecy from its shelf. Well, Voldemort doesn't want Dumbledore to know there's a spy in the Order, so he has to feign ignorance until he can spring Rookwood from Azkaban. Because just as you say, with Rookwood being a former Dept. of Mysteries worker, the Order would have no cause to believe that someone in the Order had passed along information when it clearly could have come from Rookwood. "But Rookwood could have told Voldemort before..." Jenny ventures, "when he was spying on the Ministry during VW I" Pippin shrugs. "But apparently he didn't, and Voldemort has reason to think that the Order knows he did not. Dumbledore has his spies too, you know, and Voldemort makes sure they tell Dumbledore only what Voldemort wants him to know. So, to protect his spy in the Order, Voldemort goes so far as to make a couple of fake attempts to get at the Prophecy. You'll notice he never has any of his own people try to lift it. He uses Podmore and Bode. Then he sends Nagini, who doesn't try to get through the locked door at all, but only attacks Arthur. And finally, Voldemort stages this little scene with Rookwood and makes sure Harry finds out about it. "Bon Appetit!" Pippin wishing Pip a speedy recovery > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Canon: > > 1) "And then you saw Rookwood, who worked in the Department of Mysteries before his arrest, telling Voldemort what we had known all along - that the prophecies held in the Ministry of Magic are heavily > protected. (OOP, Ch 37, p.829US) > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From gbannister10 at aol.com Tue Nov 25 11:07:31 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 11:07:31 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85860 Geoff: After I posted message 85777, Oliver contacted me off-group and we discussed the matter privately. Since the topic has continued to produce interest, I thought it might be of interest to post our email exchanges, slightly edited for the whole group. Oliver: Hi Geoff, I was the one that made the statement about Ron and the Chess set not being good players. I must say I do not have PS under my eyes now, but this is what I remember from the analysis I conducted. I seem toremember the opening is a classical king's pawn game. And now the crucial piece of information : iirc, the very first capture is the white queen taking the black knight. This means that at this very moment, black (ie Ron) is down a piece. In order to keep things even, black must now recapture a minor piece. Now I have thought hard about opening theory, and could not think of any opening where it was simply likely that the very first capture was done by the Queen taking a minor piece. When you come to think of it, this means that the previous move, Ron left his knight under threat (we know Black did not take the Queen since Ron's knight perishes under her hand). In answer to my post, it has been suggested that Ron plays with the further limitation that none of his friends can be taken, so maybe he was forced to sacrifice a knight without compensation. But even in that case, one can at least deduce that the Chess set is not a very strong player (or that Ron is truly brilliant) in order to loose a game with a minor piece up from the very beginning. If I made any mistakes in the above, blame it on the absence of PS, I can assure you that I did conduct quite an extensive search this summer. I hope I did not bother you too much with this personal mail. Geoff: By no means. However, if I can quote canon: "'White always plays first in chess,' said Ron.....'Yes, look...' A white pawn had moved forward two squares.Ron started to direct the black pieces. They moved silently wherever he sent them. Harry's knees were trembling. What of they lost? 'Harry - move diagonally four squares to the right.' Their first real shock came when their other knight was taken. the white queen smashed him to the floor and dragged him off the board where he lay quite still, face down. 'Had to let that happen,' said Ron, looking shaken. 'Leaves you free to take that bishop, Hermione, go on.' Every time one of their men was lost, the white pieces showed no mercy. Soon there was a huddle of limp black players slumped along the wall. Twice, Ron only just noticed in time that Harry and Hermione were in danger. He himself darted around the board taking almost as many white pieces as they had lost black ones. 'We're nearly there,' he muttered suddenly. 'Let me think - let me think...' The white queen turned her blank face towards him. 'Yes...' said Ron softly, 'it's the only way... I've got to be taken.' 'NO!' Harry and Hermione shouted. 'That's chess!' snapped Ron. 'You've got to make some sacrifices! I take one step forward and she'll take me - that leaves you free to checkmate the king, Harry!' 'But -' 'Do you want to stop Snape or not?' 'Ron -' 'Look, if you don't hurry up, he'll already have the Stone!' There was nothing else for it. 'Ready?' Ron called, his face pale but determined. 'Here I go - now, don't hang around once you've won.' He stepped forward and the white queen pounced. She struck Ron hard around the head...... Shaking, Harry moved three places to the left. The white king took off his crown and threw it at Harry's feet. They had won." (PS pp.205/6 UK edition) I see no evidence to deduce that the opening moves P-K4. There are other possibilities. I do not accept that the capture of the black knight was necesarily the /first/ capture. It was a shock but there may well have been exchanges of other pieces which are not catalogued. Perhaps it was a shock as it was an unexpected response but Ron seems to have had an answer in the capture of the white bishop. It seems to suggest that there may then have been a bad run of play in that several black pieces were lost but that Ron then seems to have got the game in hand and levelled the game more. As I said in my group post, I feel that the game description is far too vague to really deduce anything about Ron's skill or lack of it. However, it is an interesting point for discussion. Oliver: I stand corrected ! Indeed the first shock does not necessarily mean the first capture, as I had assumed. I had read "real shock" in the sense "the first actual confrontation" but you made me see it is more natural to see it as "the first thing that really shocked the trio." And I had mistakenly remembered the opening (I must confess that I am still inclined to believe it is a King's pawn opening though, considering Harry's first move). As I said in my group post, I feel that the game description is far too vague to really deduce anything about Ron's skill or lack of it. Let me be clear : I firmly believe JKR's intent was to show the bravery and sense of sacrifice of Ron, not to mention his chess skills. I do not think for a second that JKR even tried to describe an actual game but HP obsessed as I am I tried to see if something could be deduced from the little we know. (By the way, when you come to think of it, the move order leading to checkmate is a highly unusual one too, because if the chess set plays correctly, then the queen was forced to take Ron, so it means that Ron was checking the King and that the King could not move or that the king could move but that all his moves also lead to a mate in one move. Now we know the king has at least one free square nearby, since Harry checkmated him afterward. It is not possible that the queen was occupying this square when Ron moved, since in this case she could have interposed when Harry moved. So there was at least one free square diagonal to the king. Since we already know white was forced to take the knight, this square is under attack by a white piece. Trying to construct a position satisfying these conditions and taking into account the fact many pieces have already been taken, al I can find is a very cramped white king position, for example white king in g1, two white pawns in g2 and h2, white something in h1, white something nor rook nor queen and probably bishop because a knight should be able to interpose Harry's move in f1, black queen or rook on the g column Ron checks on h3 queen takes knight and harry checkmates on say d4. Of course there are many other possibilities, but it is just to show you what I in mind when I said I thought highly unlikely that both Ron and the Chess set play normally). I would be happy to continue this discussion, but really need to fetch a copy of PS to check what pieces exactly are played by the trio (and maybe also a chessboard). Sorry for this long mail. Geoff: I must admit that, with reference to the checkmate, I have always been a little surprised because it appears that Harry was playing as a bishop. It seems that the king was in a position where he was unchecked but, once the queen had moved to take the knight and Harry moved, he was then trapped which suggests that, unless the queen /had/ to take the knight, it was poor game analysis by the magic set - if you see my drift. Thanks for the exchange of views. I play very little chess nowadays and my tactics are a bit rusty! Geoff From jjpandy at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 21:44:46 2003 From: jjpandy at yahoo.com (jjpandy) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 21:44:46 -0000 Subject: Voldmorte's Wand and the Graveyard Scene Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85861 Some thoughts on Voldemorte's wand: There is a 13 year gap in the spells that comes out of Voldemorte's wand at the end of GoF. The gap is between the spell that killed Harry's mother and the spell that killed Bertha Jorkins. Why is there no sign of the spell that backfired from young Harry onto Voldemorte? Even though the spell did not work as intended, it still had results (Voldemorte's loss of power, Harry's scar, the creation of a link between Harry and Voldemorte). Where was Voldemorte's wand during the gap? If Peter Pettigrew helped Voldemorte get his wand back (from a hiding place?) why didn't Voldemorte retrieve his wand sooner when he had such a strong hold on Quirrel? And for the record, I am sure that Voldemorte was focused on getting the prophecy in OotP before taking any other action because the graveyard scene in GoF scared the sh-- out of him or at least made him rethink the strength of his powers. Harry was the stronger of the two in the graveyard because his wand won the battle. Voldemorte would have to admit that Harry is a serious opponent after his (Vold) wand was forced to show prior spells. How did Voldmorte save face among the Death Eaters in the graveyard after losing the battle of the wands and after Harry escaped? -JJPandy From alexandra_v at netcabo.pt Tue Nov 25 21:53:17 2003 From: alexandra_v at netcabo.pt (Alexandra Vieira) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 21:53:17 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Fury/The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives?/Poor snape References: Message-ID: <000901c3b39e$8915d560$9f4c5451@ATM> No: HPFGUIDX 85862 tanzgabu said: Snape also thought that Black was a murderer and the such. Well, he's been around many of those, and surely when they're caught they try to make up excuses to get off don't they? Along with all of these other emotional things, Snape *might possibly* have had some logic working, at least beforehand, that Sirius and Lupin might try to weasel their way out of the situation. So he probably came into the shrieking shack already ready to not listen to anything they said. If he had made a habit out of believing every murderers story, where would he be now? He doesn't really come off as a trusting person, so... I think if most of us had been in the position, even without all of the emotional entanglements he has, that we wouldn't believe the story they were putting forward. It would seem like some desperate attempt to go free. And what fool would buy into a killer's story? Certainly not Snape, in his mind. Alexandra (me): I would very much agree with all you said if it hadn't been about Snape. Yes ok, sure when a person is used to dealing with murderers and DE and LV and the Dark Arts world, one gets suspicious. But I've just re-read PoA and specially the part of them in Shrieking Shack and believe me, Snape returned to his childhood there, as if he had caught MWPP in deep trouble and was going to get them expelled! He was really excited about it! It was *his* moment! He wasn't going to let reason get in the way, he wasn't even listening. It had nothing to do with his sense of suspicion. I'm liking Snape's character more and more since I've joined this group :-) at first I thought he was just the nasty bad guy and that was it, there's one Snape in every story. Reading your posts made me re-read the books and analyse more carefuly his character and realize, there's much more to Snape than meets the eye. I would like to think he had a very dificult childhood (he did has Harry saw) and teenagehood (is that a word? hope you get my meaning) and he made a great effort to think things through and make himself take the right atitude. Snape is the kind of person who has every reason to become a DE. I'm not saying he has the right to become one, I'm just saying that it would be understandable that he becomes one and stays one. Never the less, he chose not to remain a DE! Now you might argue that maybe he didn't choose to abandon the dark arts world but was forced to do it for some reason, maybe to save his skin or something or the sort. But I say no! He *chose* to leave! Why do I think that? Because Dumbledore trusts him! And Dumbledore thinks that it is our actions, far more than our abilities, that show who we truly are! He *chose*! If we put aside the ESE!Dumbledore theory we must accept that Dumbledore's actions are very often the right ones and he is (almost) always right in his decisions. He wouldn't trust someone unless he had really strong reasons for it. Of course, he *is* really nasty and unpleasant and all that. Despite the fact that he managed to come to the "good side" he is still a very bitter person for his (still unknown) past. And although he can be very irritating sometimes I would like to see him having, if not a happy, at least a not so bad, ending. He does deserve some slack. I'm sorry this turned out to be a "poor-snape" post but I really wanted to say this and know if somebody shares my feelings about Snape. I know Eloise probably does ;-) Cheers Alexandra From Cfitz812 at aol.com Tue Nov 25 22:18:23 2003 From: Cfitz812 at aol.com (Claire) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 22:18:23 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS - Chapter 6 - The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85863 Questions are at the end because they are in the order that they occurred to me. I know there are far more than I could come up with and I've tried (no doubt unsucessfully) to not duplicate what's already been discussed with this chapter. However, since the information contained in it is fairly significant, repetition is not necessarily a bad thing. Happy discussing and Happy Thanksgiving to all my U.S. compatriots. Claire Chapter Summary: Following Sirius's revelations, Molly sends everyone to bed, ostensibly because there is so much to do the next day. Once Harry and Ron are in their room, with the door locked because Kreacher wanders where he pleases, Fred and George apparate onto their beds to discuss the "weapon". They come to no conclusion as to what or how large it is, but they all wonder about the "horrors this weapon could perpetuate". We also find out that Ginny's size is no barrier to her power with the Bat-Bogey Hex. The next morning, Harry and Ron enter the drawing room, "a long, high-ceilinged room on the first floor with olive green walls covered in dirty tapestries." Dust rises from the carpet at every step and the velvet curtains buzz. Molly, Hermione, Ginny, Fred and George are wearing cloths tied over their noses and mouths, and hold spray bottles containing a black liquid--Doxycide. Doxys have shiny beetle-like, tiny needle-sharp teeth and fairy-like bodies covered with thick black hair, and four arms. Sirius enters the room after feeding Buckbeak and examines the locked cabinet that has been shaking. He tells Molly he thinks it's a boggart, but wants Mad Eye to look at it to be sure. Harry shuts the door and Molly consults "Gilderoy Lockhart's Guide to Household Pests" on how to deal with Doxys--they bite and their teeth are poisonous. She has an antidote but would rather not have to use it. Once sprayed, Doxys are paralyzed and can be handled. On her word, they all spray at once. Harry caught one full in the face; paralyzed, it falls to the ground and Harry throws it into a bucket. He's surprised to see Fred and George pocket one and asks why. George replies they want to experiment with the venom for their Skiving Snackboxes--sweets to make you ill, not seriously but ill enough to miss classes you don't want to attend. One end makes you ill, the other revives you. The twins are carrying on with their joke shop, thanks to Harry's Triwizard Tournament winnings. They don't have premises yet, but are advertising in "The Daily Prophet". They know it's safe because Molly won't read it anymore because of the articles about Harry. Once the curtains are free of Doxys, Molly decides to wait until after lunch to tackle the cabinets. These stand on either side of the mantelpiece and are crammed full of odd things--rusty daggers, claws, a coiled snakeskin, a number of tarnished silver boxes inscribed with languages Harry can't understand, and an ornate crystal bottle with a large opal set into the stopper that Harry is sure contains blood. Mundungus Fletcher arrives with a load of cauldrons, which sets Molly off on a tirade. While they all listen to Molly carry on, Kreacher, the house elf, edges into the room. He is very old, wears a filthy rag like a loincloth, and mutters nasty things about everyone under his breath as if they can't hear him--calling Molly a blood traitor, Fred and George are brats and unnatural beasts, Hermione a Mudblood. He tells Sirius he is cleaning, but Sirius says he's only pretending so he can sneak items out of the room and hide them, especially the tapestry that has been in the family for seven generations. Sirius thinks his mother put a Permanent Sticking Charm on it so it cannot be removed. The tapestry looked extremely old and seems to have been gnawed by Doxys in places, although the embroidery of golden thread still shone brightly. It shows a family tree dating back, as far as Harry can tell, to the Middle Ages. Words at the top of the tapestry read "The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black 'Toujours Pur'". Looking closely, Harry discovers Sirius is not on the family tree. Sirius says his mother blasted him off when he ran away from home at 16--to James Potter's home. Sirius left because of his family's pure-blood mania. His brother, Regulus, joined the Death Eaters, but was murdered at Voldemort's command. Others on the Black family tree include Phineas Nigellus, Sirius's great-great-grandfather and the least popular Hogwarts headmaster; Araminta Meliflua, his mother's cousin who wanted Muggle-hunting legislation; and his Aunt Elladora, who started the tradition of beheading the house elves. Tonks and her mother, Andromeda, are no longer on the tapestry--they too have been disowned. However, Andromeda's sisters are there. Bellatrix and Narcissa. Both made good marriages to pure-bloods-- Bellatrix to Rodolphus Lestrange and Narcissa to Lucius Malfoy. And Molly and Arthur Weasley, related to Sirius, would never be on it-- blood traitors they are although pure bloods. Harry is surprised Sirius is related to the Malfoys and recalls he has seen Bellatrix before--in Dumbledore's Pensieve. Sirius and Harry talk about being stuck in places where they don't want to be. Sirius says the house is perfect for Headquarters but he feels useless. He doesn't like the inactivity. Harry asks Sirius if he can come back to live if the hearing goes badly, and Sirius replies with a sad "we'll see". That afternoon, the group tackles the cabinet, which indeed contains a number of nasty items. Sirius is bitten by a silver snuffbox that contains Wartcap powder (Fred and George sneak that one away). Harry finds a silver instrument like a many-legged pair of tweezers that tries to puncture his skin (Sirius smashes it with "Nature's Nobility: A Wizarding Genealogy". A music box plays a tune that makes them all weak and sleepy until Ginny slams it shut. An Order of Merlin, First Class that Sirius says belonged to his father for "giving a load of gold". Kreacher tries several times to sneak things out of the rubbish when they're not looking, but Sirius catches him every time. After decontaminating the drawing room the group moves on to the dining room. The Black china and several old photographs in silver frames are thrown out. Kreacher continues to wander in and out, his comments becoming more offensive each time. Other things are tackled--a bathroom where a ghoul lurks (Tonks helped with that), a grandfather clock that shoots bolts as passers-by (Lupin assisted there), and a wardrobe containing a set of purple robes that tried to strangle Ron (Mundungus freed Ron). Harry is feeling better than he has all summer, but that comes to a halt when Molly reminds him the hearing is the next day. She tells Harry he will accompany Mr. Weasley to work, but that no one else, especially Sirius, will be allowed to go--on Dumbledore's orders. Finding out Dumbledore had been at Headquarters the night before but made no attempt to see him makes Harry feel worse than ever. Questions (in no particular order): 1) What kind of reaction would someone have to Doxy poison that makes obtaining one so attractive to Fred and George for their Skivving Snackbox experiments? 2) Why did Voldemort order Regulus Black's murder? Was is just because he decided to leave the Death Eaters (the date of his death seems to be around the time of Harry`s birth)? What was he being asked to do that panicked him enough to try to get out? 3) What made Andromeda Tonks go against the pure-blood ethics of her family when her sisters were so obviously devoted to it? 4) Where does the Black family's pure-blood arrogance have its roots? Does "Nature's Nobility: A Wizarding Genealogy" hold the key? 5) What made Sirius come to hate his family's obsession with pure blood? 6) Could the crystal phial with the opal stopper hopper hold blood, as Harry assumes? If so, could it literally be "pure blood"? 7) Why does Kreacher continue to make scurrilous comments about everyone when house elves are supposed to obey members of the family they serve? He does not do what Tonks asks but is it really because she is not on the tapestry, as Sirius believes? 8) Can the Permanent Sticking Charm be undone only be the person who cast the spell? 9) Why is Ginny the only one impervious to the music box's weakening effects and is able to shut it? 10) Why did Sirius's father put "every security measure known to wizardkind" on the house? 11) If pure bloods are so limited that they have to intermarry, and Molly and Arthur are related to the Blacks, shouldn't some Weasley ancestor be on the family tree? Surely they couldn't all be "blood traitors". From dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 22:18:35 2003 From: dudemom_2000 at yahoo.com (dudemom_2000) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 22:18:35 -0000 Subject: Neville - the boy who knew too much. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85864 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "laikokae" wrote: > I'm not sure if this has been brought up already, but anyway. > > Neville knows more than a) he lets on most of the time and b) he > himself knows. > > He's clearly had a memort charm worked on him. This is fairly widely > accepted, yeah? JKR certainly isn't being too subtle on this point. >>Snip<< > > Neville also knows that its the LeStranges who tortured his parents > without being told. Which makes me wonder how much more he knows > about the Death Eaters and their trials...particularly Snape. > > Grasping at straws, > > Laik *****\(@@)/**** This makes me think there is much more to Neville's fear of Snape than just a student scared of a harsh teacher! After all, the Boggart showed that Neville's biggest fear was Snape.... Just my two knuts... Dudemom_2000 *****\(@@)/***** From suzchiles at msn.com Tue Nov 25 23:42:46 2003 From: suzchiles at msn.com (Suzanne Chiles) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 15:42:46 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ul References: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85865 > Expect much more from Severus Snape. > > Kneasy I do expect much more from Snape. In fact, I predict that Snape will sacrifice himself in order to save Harry so that Harry can fulfill the prophecy and kill Voldemort. Suzanne From Zarleycat at aol.com Wed Nov 26 00:15:56 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 00:15:56 -0000 Subject: Why Does Peter Wait to Tell Voldemort about Animagi? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85866 "Jen Reese" wrote: > I find it fascinating that Pettigrew did not tell LV about the > illegal animagi until he returns to him in GOF. Sirius says in > OOTP, "Voldemort will know all about me being an animagus by now, > Wormtail will have told him, so my big disguise is useless." (chap. > 5, p. 82). > > Why did Peter wait? > > In a thought from post 85773, David wonders if Peter was ever a true > member of the Order. It does seem Pettigrew genuinely joined the > Order for at least a short time because Sirius says in POA: "You'd > been passing information to him for a year before Lily and James > died!" and Peter responds: "He--he was taking over everywhere...Wh-- > what was there to be gained by refusing him?" (US, chap. 19, p. > 374). We don't know exactly when the Order was formed, but Voldemort > was rising throughout the 70's, with MWPP and Lily graduating in > 1978. Now me: Plus, Peter is in the picture that Mad-Eye shows to Harry in OoP, sitting between Lily and James. I don't recall if Moody mentions exactly when this picture was taken, but it would seem to indicate that Peter was a full-fledged member of the Order at that point. Jen again: That would give them 3 years to be in the Order prior to the > fateful Halloween night. So it's only presumption, but I don't think > Peter was a spy the whole time, rather he turned when LV started > taking over everywhere, and the Order was being "picked off one by > one" as Lupin tells us in OOTP. > But this bit about not telling LV about the animagi, that has me > questioning Peter's motives in betraying the Potters to LV. If he > were indeed a loyal Spy, with true allegiance to Voldemort, he would > pass on everything he knows to him. I'm wondering now if he wasn't > reserving this information as his own last "loophole" and indeed he > was able to transform and live as Wormtail for many years until > he's 'outed' in the Shrieking Shack. Then his choice is between > joining LV and going to Azkaban, and he chooses LV again. My feeling about Peter is that he is not true-blue DE material. I think that he was somehow coerced or threatened into giving information to Voldemort's crew. Perhaps he was fingered by a DE who knew him at Hogwarts as someone who was not strong enough or brave enough to stand on his own, but as a possible weak link in Dumbledore's camp who, very conveniently for V-mort, was a close friend of James Potter. Then suppose Peter is presented with a threat, such as a demand for low-level information as a way to keep his Mum safe. "Okay," Peter figures, "what they're asking me is not going to be too threatening and doesn't put anyone in the Order in danger, and, if I give them this info, Mum is safe and everything is okay." Of course, once he's taken a step down that road, the demands escalate. Peter is afraid to refuse handing over information and afraid to admit to his friends what he's done. Then, as the DEs seem to be winning, it becomes that much easier for him to go along with their plans. Jen: > Pettigrew seems to crave becoming part of the "inner circle" whether > it's with the Marauders or LV. Perhaps he thought by helping LV back > to life, telling him about the illegal animagi, that he would be > elevated in LV's circle of DE's. But LV continues to be contemptuous > of him, and Pettigrew is conspicuously absent in OOTP. > To me, Pettigrew is the true wildcard. His motives are so shifty and > he seems to have true allegiance to no one but himself. And the life- > debt with Harry adds another level of ambiguity to this already > shadowy character. What is he going to do next?! I wouldn't be > surprised to find out Wormtail has disappeared from Voldemort's > service and will turn up at a crucial moment in the coming War. YOu'd think by know that Peter realizes that he will never rise in Voldemort's estimation. I wonder if that attitude will one day bite the Big V right in the butt. I agree that Peter's main allegiance is to himself. I don't think he necessarily wants others to die, but, if the choice is between his own skin and killing someone else on Vmort's orders, like Cedric, then kill him Peter will. And, since Peter seems to be strongly motivated by his own self- preservation, why would he necessarily let something like a life-debt stand in his way? Has JKR planted a red herring in all of our minds? We assume that anyone owing this debt will honor it. Why? What happens if someone doesn't honor it? What punishment falls on the head of someone who deliberately ignores paying off the debt when they have an opportunity to do so? I think the only reason Peter might do it would be, again, to try to build up some credit with someone who might save his (Peter's) neck. However, that person is Harry. Harry may very well be saved in some way by Peter, but that doesn't absolve Peter from the debt he owes for his part in the deaths of Harry's parents and the wrongful imprisonment of Sirius. I can see Harry saying thank you very much to Peter, and then hauling him back to the good guys to face the music for his earlier wrongs. And, I think Peter may realize that in the back of his rat brain. So, does he pay off the life debt? Or does he merely blow it off? Marianne From hieya at hotmail.com Wed Nov 26 00:26:34 2003 From: hieya at hotmail.com (greatlit2003) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 00:26:34 -0000 Subject: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ul In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85867 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > We don't know just how deeply Minerva is involved in the Order. > According to canon, she was not in the 'old' Order and has been > mentioned as in the vicinity of Grimmauld Place just once. So, her > depth of knowledge re DD's plans are a bit of an unknown. If I > read DD's character correctly, he says nuthin' to nobody; this > would mean that a state of almost total ignorance applies to all > the members except Snape. > In PoA, Harry overhears McGonagall talking in the Three Broomsticks, where she remembers that Dumbledore offered to be the Potters' Secret-Keeper, but James insisted on using Sirius. She was probably in the old Order to have even witnessed the conversation between James and Dumbledore. greatlit2003 From marylandman1115 at yahoo.com Tue Nov 25 19:17:07 2003 From: marylandman1115 at yahoo.com (marylandman1115) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 19:17:07 -0000 Subject: Fwd: Re: [HPforGrownups] Hagrid a spy? In-Reply-To: <3fc27d0d.1c58.0@bestweb.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85868 ephilipbar Says: > I don't think Hagrid could be the spy based upon the clear documentation > in canon about his feelings for Dumbledore, "great man Dumbledore" starting > with his virulent reaction to Mr Dursley's slight about Harry's new school and > its headmaster. This would be too much of a radical departure of character. > Later in OOP when "professor" Umbridge and her flunkeys come to sack Hagrid, > several of them throw curses every which way, none of them seem to have any > effect. Hermione even comments how this must be due to Hagrid's giant/ mixed > blood. I have a hard time believing even LV would be able to throw the > Imperius. Although, hey, nothing is impossible. > Lastly, LV himself skulked in the Forbidden Forest as VoldeQuirrel on the > prowl for the stray unicorn.. and he spent all that time in Albania. He > probably would be able to get in and out without Hagrid. Especially > considering the centaurs would not knowingly interfere with humans/ wizards. I agree with what you are saying about how loyal Hagird is at the begining, but what if during the time he was missing the imperius Curse was used. I understand what you are saying about all the wizards tring to put a curse on him, but they are not LV. Who I would suspect is far more powerful then all of them. He has soom weakness, remember he was in prison for a time and the Dementors were able to control him. I am also sure that the giants may have helped in this since it looks as they will being siding with LV. I think it would be a neat twist. Other things to think about though with this, JKR every once in awhile shows a dark side to Hagrid as well. She tells us about him being in Knockturn Alley, how well he knows the forest, making blackmarket deals, and that he is half giant. Lastly, this would also explain how Malfoy knew that Hagrid was on a mission to the giants. With his father being a DE I am sure he has heard a number of conversations among the DE. One of them could be that they had capture Hagrid and they plan on using him. Makes your mind work a bit dosen't it? Tim From kate_bag at hotmail.com Tue Nov 25 21:43:05 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 21:43:05 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85869 > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > I have speculated in the past that, in the end, it will not be a > > show of raw force on Harry's part that defeats Voldemort, but an > > act of compassion, of benevolence, mercy, and charity that causes Voldemort > > to crumble in the face of a power he can never understand. Wow, this is such an intersting idea, and out of all thoughts I had about what it is in Harry would finally destroy Voldemort, I never thought of an act of kindness towards him, or even that an act of love would bring about his demise... But the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. I mean, everything we hear about the great wizards ie. Dumbledore, Voldemort, even Snape, Sirius and James, is that they had great ability even at a young age. Snape came to Hogwarts already knowledgeable about a great deal of magic, Dumbledore "did things with a wand that [the ministry of magic OWL examiner] had never seen before", Dumbledore himself said that Tom Riddle was the most brilliant student he ever taught, and Sirius and James were so brilliant that they learned to be anamagi by their fifth? year, all on their own. I guess what I am trying to say is that Harry, though bright enough, and maybe a little bit outstanding in the dark arts, shows none of this brilliance. It would be fitting, therefore, if how he defeated him in the end was not with malice, but with kindness and love (the force which "he possesses is great quantities and of which Voldemort has none"). It brings about another question: if the prophecy hadn't been made at all, would Voldemort have reached his demise? (assuming that he DOES reach his demise via Harry in the 7th book)...Just think about it, Voldemort would have had no reason to try and kill baby Harry, therefore no ancient protective magic...In a way, Voldemort learning about the prophecy is what got him into this predicament in the first place...but I guess that's the thing about a prophecy, once it's been set into motion, there is no going back. I've confused even myself. ~Kate From alexandra_v at netcabo.pt Tue Nov 25 22:12:29 2003 From: alexandra_v at netcabo.pt (Alexandra Vieira) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 22:12:29 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Neville - the boy who knew too much. References: Message-ID: <001d01c3b3a1$3775cf00$9f4c5451@ATM> No: HPFGUIDX 85870 laikokae said: ? When Harry goes to take the prophecy, Neville doesn't hesitate or say he thinks it's a bad idea like Hermione does. Instead he snaps suddenly, "No, dont!", while looking tense and stressed out. Conclusion: Neville knows something about the prophecy. During the following fight with the death eaters, it is also Neville who is most vocal about keeping the prophecy away from the Death Eaters. "Whatever you do, don't give it to them!" The others don't seem to care nearly as much, because the others, unlike Neville, don't know what's at stake. ? Alexandra: Your post got me thinking... you really have a point there. The thing is, we all know that JKR doesn't do things just because. She didn't put Neville there for no reason! I mean, Neville?!!! Look at him! Appart from the obvious nervous and clumsy character, Neville is the sort of person Harry wouldn't like to be with when Cho sees him! He's not a usual companion to HRH's adventures!!! Neville being there struck me as so odd! Of course I didn't give it a second thought and moved on reading and eventually forgot about the detail. But your post has caught my attention to it again. It's really obvious. Neville *didn't* have to be there! But the fact is, he was. Why? Maybe to get our atention to the fact that he really knows something like you said, maybe because he had to break his wand (that also strikes me as an important fact). Hope we'll find out in book 6. Don't you sometimes feel like kidnapping JKR and make her tell you the whole story till the end? :P [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From alexandra_v at netcabo.pt Tue Nov 25 22:38:26 2003 From: alexandra_v at netcabo.pt (Alexandra Vieira) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 22:38:26 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) References: Message-ID: <003b01c3b3a4$d7f82c40$9f4c5451@ATM> No: HPFGUIDX 85871 I don't think Harry will kill LV and that's it. He can't do that, he's not like that. In PoA, he had just learnt that Wormtail had killed his parents and, in spite of his anger he didn't let Remus and Sirius kill him. He showed mercy, not because of Wormtail but because "I don't reckon my dad would've wanted them to become killers -- just for you." (HP in PoA) I don't think he will become a killer just for LV Alexandra [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From lliannanshe_ensueno at verizon.net Wed Nov 26 00:59:45 2003 From: lliannanshe_ensueno at verizon.net (Lliannanshe) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 00:59:45 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS - Chapter 6 - The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85872 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Claire" wrote: <> >Sirius is bitten by a silver snuffbox that >contains Wartcap powder (Fred and George sneak that one away). <> Was it the box that bit Sirius? In FBWTFT there is a house pest called Chizpurfle. It is very small with large fangs. They attack magical objects and drink lingering potions. Swollen with magical substances they are hard to fight. PG 7 So the pests eat through the box containing the wartcap powder and attack Sirius when he picks up the box. <> > 1) What kind of reaction would someone have to Doxy poison that > makes obtaining one so attractive to Fred and George for their > Skivving Snackbox experiments? <> What could Fred and George do with Doxy poison and microscopic parasites that drink magical potions and attack anyone who comes near them. Gives me the Willies Lliannanshe From hieya at hotmail.com Wed Nov 26 02:20:50 2003 From: hieya at hotmail.com (greatlit2003) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 02:20:50 -0000 Subject: Sirius / Severus (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85873 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" wrote: >Severus is on Severus' side, plain and simple. > He's got something he needs done and he'll do what it takes to see it > through. > Brilliant. Ten points to your House :) In my opinion, that statement sums up what Severus is all about. I don't see him as the community- minded person that DD is (the welfare of the world is not his concern). Nevertheless, I think that Snape does have a sense of responsibility in completing what he set out to do, and he will help anyone who helped him (i.e. Dumbledore). I think of Snape as a deeply driven individual who is not afraid to take risks to accomplish his goals. What sets him apart from Gryffindors is his self-centeredness. He is not like Harry, who has always fought on behalf of others (except in the graveyard, where Harry was just trying to survive. But even there, Harry took a risk in saving Cedric's body). While Harry's motivation in taking risks has always been about "doing the right thing", Snape has more clearly defined goals. DD helps him, so he will help DD, which includes teaching Harry Occlumency, etc. James saved his life, so he tried to return the favor by telling DD that V-mort was after the Potters. In spite of Snape's efforts, James still died. So, Snape saved Harry's life ten years later to pay back his debt. The question I want answered is whether Snape loves anyone? He is loyal to DD, but are they friends in the Gryffindor way? Would Snape die for someone not to fulfill his own agenda, but just out of love? Sadly, I suspect that the answer to this is no, which is perhaps why JKR seems so fond of Sirius, but not Snape (from what I understand by looking at interviews). Sirius wasn't a much better human being than Snape is (aside from the Death Eater past), but he at least put other people's needs above his own. Sirius was arrogant, immature, hot-headed, and had a questionable sense of humor, but he was a loyal friend and a loving godfather. I'm not sure if Snape, in spite of all the work he does for the Order, has this capability. I see a lot of parallels between Sirius and Severus, and I wonder why they are so different? They were both exposed to the Dark Arts at a young age, and presumably had bad childhoods, including abusive parents and dysfunctional families. So why did Sirius develop the capability to love, and become an outgoing person, while Severus withdrew into himself? I think that with these two characters, JKR is examining two possible outcomes of similar situations. Granted, we don't know everything about Severus yet, but from what we do know, I think that it is safe to say that his past gave him a drive to study the Dark Arts (possibly because of his father?) so that he would be able to defend himself. Sirius, on the other hand, shunned his past. Any thoughts? greatlit2003 who doesn't want Snape to die, but if he does, he should in a better way than Sirius :) From laikokae at hotmail.com Wed Nov 26 02:26:02 2003 From: laikokae at hotmail.com (laikokae) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 02:26:02 -0000 Subject: Neville - the boy who knew too much. In-Reply-To: <001d01c3b3a1$3775cf00$9f4c5451@ATM> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85874 > Alexandra wrote: > Your post got me thinking... you really have a point there. The thing is, we all know that JKR doesn't do things just because. She didn't put Neville there for no reason! << <> Neville *didn't* have to be there! But the fact is, he was. Why? << I also find it very interesting that during the whole Department of Mysteries debacle, Neville is the only one aside from Harry who touches the prophecy. I can't help but think that this is an anvil- sized hint from JKR. Neville is still apart of that prophecy. I'm sure of it. Being driven out her mind by curiousity, Laik. From amani at charter.net Wed Nov 26 02:50:17 2003 From: amani at charter.net (Taryn Kimel) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 21:50:17 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Neville - the boy who knew too much. References: Message-ID: <006d01c3b3c8$07067280$0400a8c0@charterpa.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85875 > Alexandra wrote: > Your post got me thinking... you really have a point there. The thing is, we all know that JKR doesn't do things just because. She didn't put Neville there for no reason! << <> Neville *didn't* have to be there! But the fact is, he was. Why? << Laik: I also find it very interesting that during the whole Department of Mysteries debacle, Neville is the only one aside from Harry who touches the prophecy. I can't help but think that this is an anvil- sized hint from JKR. Neville is still apart of that prophecy. I'm sure of it. Taryn: Although I think Neville definitely has a large part to play, especially in regards to the prophecy, I don't think this is a hint. I think that once Harry took the prophecy off the shelf, anyone could touch it. That is why it was so important to get him there, and why the DE's had to wait for him to pick it up to attempt a retrieval of it. ---------- Taryn : http://taryn.shirataki.net [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From oodaday at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 26 03:09:59 2003 From: oodaday at yahoo.co.uk (oodaday) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 19:09:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: It may be M.A.D. but it's mine Message-ID: <20031126030959.51931.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85876 Driving home from a long road trip I got to thinking about Mrs. Figg and who she was before she married. We don?t know a lot about her except that she is a dotty old lady who was stationed to watch over Harry, probably placed there by Dumbledore. I doubt she lived on Wisteria Walk before Harry arrived at the Dursley?s. The thing that struck me as the most odd about her was how did she become a part of the Old Crowd? Since she is a squib, she didn?t attend Hogwarts, but obviously knows Dumbledore and has a significant position of trust. Why would she be a member of the Order in the first place? Being a squib all she can do is blend in with the muggles. A witch or wizard who?s taken muggle studies could be used for that. She wasn?t useful when Harry got attacked by the Dementors. She didn?t have a way to contact The Order until Dung came back. Yes, she communicates with her cats, and she uses them as spies, yet they can?t do magic either. But, if she is related to Dumbledore, the head of the Order, I?m sure she has ways to contact family members. Introducing my M.A.D. theory. Miss Arabella Dumbledore. It would make sense if she were Dumbledore?s little sister. Consider their names. We have Albus, Aberforth, and now Arabella. Now, before you start posting about how weak that is, remember the Lucius/Lupin connection Pippin came up with, and the missing ?D? child of the Weasley?s. * And * Harry says she?s a ?mad old lady.? :o) (ss/ps pg 22 scholastic). So there you have it, do with it what you will, but be gentle, this is my first theory. --Dooda, wondering if Tabouli can come up with a better acronym --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From melclaros at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 04:10:12 2003 From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 04:10:12 -0000 Subject: Sirius / Severus (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85877 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatlit2003" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" > wrote: > > >Severus is on Severus' side, plain and simple. > > He's got something he needs done and he'll do what it takes to see > it > > through. > > Brilliant. Ten points to your House :) In my opinion, that statement > sums up what Severus is all about. me: Why thank you! You can probably tell I've spent a lot of time considering this. you: > The question I want answered is whether Snape loves anyone? me: Now here I suspect that question might be wrong. Does he? That's an *interesting* question to be sure, but not really the one that leads to: you: > Would Snape die for someone not to fulfill his own agenda, but >just out of love? Sadly, I suspect that the answer to this is no, me: I think, and this might surprise you, that that answer is 'yes'. Whether or not 'love' has anything to do with this vendetta he's working with now is the *really* interesting question. It is possible that someone he loved hurt him so badly--or someone he loved was hurt so badly that that is what's driving toward vengence now. (I see those banners waving, I do!) Do I think that IS what's driving him? I honestly don't know. (If it is, my vote would have to go with the former.) you: > I see a lot of parallels between Sirius and Severus, and I wonder > why they are so different? They were both exposed to the Dark Arts > at a young age, and presumably had bad childhoods, including abusive > parents and dysfunctional families. So why did Sirius develop the > capability to love, and become an outgoing person, while Severus > withdrew into himself? I think that with these two characters, JKR > is examining two possible outcomes of similar situations. Granted, > we don't know everything about Severus yet, but from what we do > know, I think that it is safe to say that his past gave him a drive > to study the Dark Arts (possibly because of his father?) so that he > would be able to defend himself. Sirius, on the other hand, shunned > his past. me: I've always thought that one of the reasons Severus and Sirius couldn't stand each other was that they were so very much alike. They look somewhat alike (sorry Sirius fans, but it's true) and because I am absolutley *sure* Severus is related to Phineas it appears to me (it did before but it's clearer now) that they are related--cousins of some sort at least. It seemed to me, and this was re-inforced in OoP, that they saw in each other traits they hated in themselves. Why did Sirius develop the way he did? He got out. He escaped the horror of his family home. Severus, apparently, did not. We might be safe in assuming that while Severus was alone in his room stunning flies, Sirius was at the Potters, having a grand old time and learning what it's like to be appreciated for who you are-despite who you are I might add. If we use pop-culture terms Sirius, the 'jock' was surrounded by buddies, always with a crowd and had constant affirmation about how worthwhile he was. Severus, the 'goth' or let's just say 'weirdo' since that's what Sirius said, spent all his time alone, convincing himself he was worthless and that the only way to get out of his dreary life was death--or, since he was a wizard a life in the dark arts. Then along came Voldemort...or Lucius if you like that route. But I've said most of this before--we can only hope we'll get an answer. Mel, wondering if she's got that snapologist qualification yet From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 04:48:37 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 04:48:37 -0000 Subject: Quidditch commentator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85878 -Berit Jakobsen wrote: > > > Who do you think will get Lee Jordan's job now that he's left > > > Hogwarts? The Quidditch games won't be the same without a witty > > > commmentator... Any (obvious) candidates? > > > > > > > > Dmoorehpnc > > Three Cheers for Creevey > > Creevey! Creevey! Creevey! I think Colin Creevey would be an > > excellent choice. Who worships Harry more than him? > > > > Just think of it. A whole new way for Colin to drive Harry > absolutely nuts! All those embarrassing comments Harry doesn't want > others to hear... > > Ravenclaw Bookworm Or have the Creevey brothers act as a journalistic team, with Colin continuing to take photos and the excitable Dennis as commentator. Never a dull moment on the quidditch pitch. Carol, who confesses that quidditch is one of her least favorite elements of the WW. Ow! Watch where you're hitting that bludger! From helen at odegard.com Wed Nov 26 05:05:26 2003 From: helen at odegard.com (Helen R. Granberry) Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 21:05:26 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ron's chess-playing skills In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <00ab01c3b3da$e7ff5a60$6401a8c0@helenw1> No: HPFGUIDX 85879 Thank you Geoff and Oliver. I am not a chess player, so this kind of insight is very much appreciated. A friend of mine and I are working on a theory involving the chess game played at the end of PS/SS and what it might symbolize for the series as a whole. Note, the first piece that 'shocks the trio' is a Black Knight that had to be taken -- Sirius? Ron is seemingly set up to be a great chess player. He continues to play chess, and chess is used as a metaphor in at least three places in OotP. To me, it doesn't look like he was given this skill for the simple purpose of this one scene. I would also like to point out that Ron plays two roles in the chess game -- he is the Knight, but he also gives the orders and directs the game (is the King). Does this ring any bells for anyone? ;-) For the movie, they brought in a chess expert to choreograph the scene. I know this is a canon only discussion list, but I feel it may give a little insight: http://www.jeremysilman.com/movies_tv_js/harry_potter.html The producers wanted to see a pawn fall. They wanted a capture. And it kind of makes me wonder if they were trying to illustrate the death of Cedric (which they knew about at that point while the did not know about Sirius). Thanks again, Helen From free_lunch_club at hotmail.com Wed Nov 26 07:22:15 2003 From: free_lunch_club at hotmail.com (thetruthisoutthere_13) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 07:22:15 -0000 Subject: Ravenclaw Mascot-Challenging Lexicon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85880 Arya Wrote: > I see on the Lexicon that Ravenclaw's house mascot is listed as the Eagle > and not a Raven. I am searching for canon to confirm the true mascot of the > House. Does anyone have any references they can point me towards that I > am missing and not recalling? On page 683, American Edition of OotP, Luna walks by with "what appears to be a live eagle perched on top of her head". Given that she wore a lion to support Gryffindor, this text implies that that an eagle is the mascot of Ravenclaw. -kg From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 26 07:55:51 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 07:55:51 -0000 Subject: It may be M.A.D. but it's mine In-Reply-To: <20031126030959.51931.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85881 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says Well, *I* like it, speaking as one who was desperately disappointed in Squib!Figg after all the fanfic speculation: she was Mad-Eye Moody's wife or sister, she was an Auror warrior princess, she was Draco's old nanny... And if the names are arranged strictly alphabetically, Aberforth is the oldest, Albus the middle and Arabella the youngest; this lends credence to a theory I've had since SS/PS which is that Ron (long nose, red hair, easily dismissed kid brother) is the one destined to teach at Hogwarts and eventually become Headmaster. --JDR, whose theory that Voldemort is really Smurf nemesis Gargamel needs just a tiny bit of tweaking to make its acronym work out to VIAGRA... From udderpd at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 26 10:38:24 2003 From: udderpd at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?udder=5Fpen=5Fdragon?=) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 10:38:24 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] It may be M.A.D. but it's mine In-Reply-To: <20031126030959.51931.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20031126103824.78120.qmail@web25107.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85882 oodaday wrote: Driving home from a long road trip I got to thinking about Mrs. Figg and who she was before she married. We don?t know a lot about her except that she is a dotty old lady who was stationed to watch over Harry, probably placed there by Dumbledore. I doubt she lived on Wisteria Walk before Harry arrived at the Dursley?s. The thing that struck me as the most odd about her was how did she become a part of the Old Crowd? Since she is a squib, she didn?t attend Hogwarts, but obviously knows Dumbledore and has a significant position of trust. Why would she be a member of the Order in the first place? Being a squib all she can do is blend in with the muggles. A witch or wizard who?s taken muggle studies could be used for that. She wasn?t useful when Harry got attacked by the Dementors. She didn?t have a way to contact The Order until Dung came back. Yes, she communicates with her cats, and she uses them as spies, yet they can?t do magic either. But, if she is related to Dumbledore, the head of the Order, I?m sure she has ways to contact family members. Introducing my M.A.D. theory. Miss Arabella Dumbledore. It would make sense if she were Dumbledore?s little sister. Consider their names. We have Albus, Aberforth, and now Arabella. Now, before you start posting about how weak that is, remember the Lucius/Lupin connection Pippin came up with, and the missing ?D? child of the Weasley?s. * And * Harry says she?s a ?mad old lady.? :o) (ss/ps pg 22 scholastic). So there you have it, do with it what you will, but be gentle, this is my first theory. --Dooda, wondering if Tabouli can come up with a better acronym U_P_D Not a bad theory compared to some we see here. One significant advantage Miss Figg had was that she was not known to the Wizarding World generally, but Fudge seems to have ruined that Udder Pendragon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts to which you're replying! Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ --------------------------------- Want to chat instantly with your online friends??Get the FREE Yahoo!Messenger [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 26 12:44:55 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 12:44:55 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85883 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > > I have speculated in the past that, in the end, it will not be a show > of raw force on Harry's part that defeats Voldemort, but an act of > compassion, of benevolence, mercy, and charity that causes Voldemort > to crumble in the face of a power he can never understand. > Oh, dear. As an enthusiastic afficianado of gore-splattered mayhem I am under- whelmed, nay, distressed by the current outbreak of touchy-feely new age 'don't let's be nasty to Voldemort.' It seems that although he and his enthusiastic band of supremacist murderers have slaughtered uncounted innocents over the years, all his sins will be wiped out by the goodness in Harry's heart. Arrrgh! So Harry is full of love, is he? OK, where is it and who is it for? Apart from a brief exposure to what many claim to be love for Sirius (and I have my suspicions about how long that would have lasted when he realised what a truly pathetic figure Sirius was), when has Harry shown love for anyone? He hasn't. Dumbledore goes whittering on about a power that Voldemort can't understand. Right. *Dumbledore* says it. Assuming he can be trusted (a massive assumption given his past form), how does he know? He went on about the 'old magic Voldemort doesn't understand' on a previous occasion and that turned out to be protective, not a universal power that brings peace, love, reconciliation and free beer for all. It seems to me that the only way for DD to be so sure is if Dumbledore *arranged* for this power to be there. Not a happy thought if you recall how Harry has managed to screw up DD's plans in the past. Why should Voldy be let off the hook? Can he even be considered to be human anymore? Not by my standards. He has become the embodiment of evil; not just a misguided delinquent who can be brought back to the paths of righteousness by a little tough love, but a soul-searing, truly deadly construct formed by Dark Magic. And damn near immmortal. That 'near immortality' is a clue, I think. He *can* be killed, somehow. And if he doesn't go down in flames JKRs mail box will be getting a very stiff note from yours truly. Geoff, LotR cheerleader and proslytiser (enjoy the rugby Geoff? Me too.) has tried to draw parallels between the downfall of Sauron and what might happen to Voldy. Hmm. Well, we don't have a McGuffin like the Ring in the Potterverse; an object that is the materialisation of the power and personality of the arch-fiend. If it existed I think we would have heard about it by now. And if you want to look for pointers in LotR consider what happened to Saruman; evil, forgiven, still bad and then killed. What could be more satisfying? Given his history, would you believe Voldy if he promised to behave and not to do it again? Really? If you do, I have this treasure map; it's yours for a modest sum. No, Voldy is no longer a person, where it could be argued that he should be treated as if he were redeemable. He is a concentration, a condensation of evil, risen from a cauldron of blood, bone and Dark Magic, an elemental force almost, not Tom Riddle in fancy dress. I can believe that this unknown power in Harry might save him (again!) from Voldemort, just as it did in the Ministry, but I don't believe it can change Voldemort in a Scrooge-like conversion accompanied by soaring strings and a heavenly choir. In any worthwhile tale such a being is slated for destruction, and rightly so. Despite the protestations of Berit, bboy and others, I want to see evil in the manifestation of Voldemort destroyed, an acceptably moral ending IMO and not one that would cause Harry to either suffer guilt or to become tainted himself. Come on, now! Wave the FEATHERBOAS! Kneasy From belijako at online.no Wed Nov 26 14:19:49 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 14:19:49 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85884 Kneazy wrote: Oh, dear. > As an enthusiastic afficianado of gore-splattered mayhem I am under- > whelmed, nay, distressed by the current outbreak of touchy-feely > new age 'don't let's be nasty to Voldemort.' It seems that although he > and his enthusiastic band of supremacist murderers have slaughtered > uncounted innocents over the years, all his sins will be wiped out by > the goodness in Harry's heart. Arrrgh! Me: Hehe, Kneazy: I never said Voldemort is not going to be destroyed! I just don't think it will happen in a frenzy of hatred from Harry; "Take that!" *splash* and "take this" *the breaking of bones* and "serves you right" *splat; tearing out Voldemort's eyes*... This is hard. I am not denying book 5-Harry seems to harbour a lot of hatred in his heart (at the end of book five a lot of it is directed against Snape). But you must admit the way Rowling writes, she opens up for another way of defeating Voldemort than just doing it the Voldemort way? There's too much talk and insinuations about that mysterious force, the thing Harry has that Voldie hasn't. I'm leaning more against Harry defeating Voldemort the way he "defeated" him in MoM: Not cursing him with the AK, but overwhelming Lord Thingy with his feelings for Sirius; resulting in Voldie having to flee the scene. I am not saying harry will not be in a real fight with Voldemort trying to use every spell there is (except the unforgivable ones of course).I can imagine a figthing scene where Harry's magical skills turn out to be inferior to Voldie's, and where Voldie is about to finish him off. Then something unexpected happens like in the graveyard or the MoM scene. That would be consistent with a Rowling's plot. And by the way; New Age-philosophy is certainly NOT my thing :-) I don't want to be put in that category. You know; the notions of love and selfless, (non-violent) heroic sacrifice is also a Christian thought... Berit From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 14:26:21 2003 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 14:26:21 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85885 Check out new info added to timeline and see if you agree. Input appreciated. Marci (down with Lexicon) LOL > As for the timeline, it has been broadened a bit and is on the web > and up for review. I hope you all can take a look and give some > input. I'd appreciate it. > > See it here: http://www.geocities.com/adulthpfanatics/HPtimeline.html > > The website is still up at > www.geocities.com/blackgold101/HPfiles.html but will be moving to > www.geocities.com/adulthpfanatics > as soon as I get off my lazy but and move it. > > Marci From quigonginger at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 14:43:11 2003 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 14:43:11 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85886 Kneasy wrote: (Big Snip) > Why should Voldy be let off the hook? Can he even be considered to be > human anymore? Not by my standards. He has become the embodiment > of evil; not just a misguided delinquent who can be brought back to the > paths of righteousness by a little tough love, but a soul-searing, truly > deadly construct formed by Dark Magic. And damn near immmortal. (snip) > Given his history, would you believe Voldy if he promised to behave > and not to do it again? Really? If you do, I have this treasure map; it's > yours for a modest sum. > > No, Voldy is no longer a person, where it could be argued that he should > be treated as if he were redeemable. He is a concentration, a condensation > of evil, risen from a cauldron of blood, bone and Dark Magic, an elemental > force almost, not Tom Riddle in fancy dress. Ginger adds: Kneasy, you are right on about the above. (I disagree about the part on Sirius I snipped, but that is another thread) LV has proven time and time again that he will continue to do evil. He *will* not be turned, which means that, short of a Lockhart-like oblivion, he *can* not be turned. He will go to any lenghths, including murder to get what he wants, and does it without remorse. He cannot want to be good because he sees no difference between good and evil (only power and those too weak to seek it-to finish the quote). To refuse to destroy (and by that I mean kill or any other means) him, is to allow him to continue. If Harry refuses to kill him if given the chance, Harry will have the lives of those who are later killed on his head. This is not a Pettigrew that one can assume can be turned over to the authorities, this is pure evil incarnate. Hide him in Azkaban for 100 years, and he will continue upon his release. Harry will have to do *something* to kill him, even if not an unforgivable. "Accio entrails" would work just as well. > Come on, now! Wave the FEATHERBOAS! > Ginger, Waving her FEATHERBOA proudly (mine's MAUVE-Mangle And Unravel Voldy's Entrails) From aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au Wed Nov 26 14:44:37 2003 From: aussie_lol at yahoo.com.au (Hagrid) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 14:44:37 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85887 > Check out new info added to timeline and see if you agree. Input > appreciated. > > Marci (down with Lexicon) LOL > > > As for the timeline, it has been broadened a bit and is on the > > web and up for review. I hope you all can take a look and give > > some input. I'd appreciate it. > > > > See it here: > http://www.geocities.com/adulthpfanatics/HPtimeline.html 2 entries on the time line are: 1944 Tom Riddle and parents murdered in Little Hangleton 1945 Dumbledore defeats dark wizard Grindelwald For Tom's complete transition to the Dark side, i am of the opinion that he met Grindelwald. The execution of his father and grandparents seem almost part of a ritual or initiation test in relation to his next dark step. So my quiry is: In what month did the murders took place? ... or was it sometime during the 1944-45 school year placing it closer to Grindelwald's defeat? ~aussie~ From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Nov 26 14:57:38 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 14:57:38 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85888 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" wrote: > Check out new info added to timeline and see if you agree. Input > appreciated. > > Marci (down with Lexicon) LOL > > > As for the timeline, it has been broadened a bit and is on the web > > and up for review. I hope you all can take a look and give some > > input. I'd appreciate it. > > > > See it here: > http://www.geocities.com/adulthpfanatics/HPtimeline.html Hi. :-) The part about Charlie's birth year can't be true. If he were born in 1974, he would have entered Hogwarts in 1985 and would still have been there when Harry came to Hogwarts in 1991. Hickengruendler From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 15:08:30 2003 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 15:08:30 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85889 "hickengruendler" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" > wrote: > > Check out new info added to timeline and see if you agree. Input > > appreciated. > > > > Marci (down with Lexicon) LOL > > > > > As for the timeline, it has been broadened a bit and is on the > web > > > and up for review. I hope you all can take a look and give some > > > input. I'd appreciate it. > > > > > > See it here: > > http://www.geocities.com/adulthpfanatics/HPtimeline.html > > Hi. :-) > > The part about Charlie's birth year can't be true. If he were born in > 1974, he would have entered Hogwarts in 1985 and would still have > been there when Harry came to Hogwarts in 1991. > > Hickengruendler ME: That's why these parts, as well as Bill's, have question marks. Bill was originally listed as 1968-70, and Charlie was c.1972-3. It's still being worked on. Trust me. LOL Marci From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 15:46:40 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 15:46:40 -0000 Subject: Neville - the boy who knew too much. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85890 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "laikokae" wrote: > > > Alexandra wrote: > > > ... The thing is, we all know that JKR doesn't do things just > because. She didn't put Neville there for no reason! << > > <> Neville *didn't* have to be there! But the fact is, he was. > Why? << > Laik: > > I also find it very interesting that during the whole Department of > Mysteries debacle, ... I can't help but think that this is an anvil- > sized hint from JKR. Neville is still apart of that prophecy. I'm > sure of it. > > Being driven out her mind by curiousity, > > Laik. bboy_mn: There is a reason for Neville to be at the Ministry of Magic Battle; that reason is to show the transition of Neville from who we thought he was into who he is destine to be. Neville was the only one who was in the fight from beginning to end. He was the only one who time and time again charge from safety (relatively speaking) into the thick of battle to fight at Harry's side. And indeed, through direct actions and provoking reactions, saved Harry's life more than once (in my opinion). He showed us that he, Neville, despite his mild timid manner, does not fear pain, injury, or even death if the cause is worthy enough. In a sense, Neville as a character is being reborn, and we were there to witness that labor; in the next book, I am certain that the character Neville will take on a whole new life and significants. I also agree that Neville is still, and always was, very very much a part of the prophecy; a part of it in ways that will ultimately leave us stunned, entertained, but stunned none the less. Just a thought from a Neville fan. bboy_mn From catherinemck at hotmail.com Wed Nov 26 16:59:01 2003 From: catherinemck at hotmail.com (catherinemckiernan) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 16:59:01 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85891 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > Kneazy wrote: > > Oh, dear. > > As an enthusiastic afficianado of gore-splattered mayhem I am > under- > > whelmed, nay, distressed by the current outbreak of touchy-feely > > new age 'don't let's be nasty to Voldemort.' It seems that although > he > > and his enthusiastic band of supremacist murderers have slaughtered > > uncounted innocents over the years, all his sins will be wiped out > by > > the goodness in Harry's heart. Arrrgh! > > Berit wrote: > > Hehe, Kneazy: I never said Voldemort is not going to be destroyed! I > just don't think it will happen in a frenzy of hatred from > Harry; "Take that!" *splash* and "take this" *the breaking of bones* > and "serves you right" *splat; tearing out Voldemort's eyes*... This > is hard. I am not denying book 5-Harry seems to harbour a lot of > hatred in his heart (at the end of book five a lot of it is directed > against Snape). But you must admit the way Rowling writes, she opens > up for another way of defeating Voldemort than just doing it the > Voldemort way? There's too much talk and insinuations about that > mysterious force, the thing Harry has that Voldie hasn't. Then me: What if the mysterious force were actually a mysterious lack of force? The power of inadequacy rather than the power of love. Oh, love's easily assumed, because that's just the sort of touchy-feely thing Dd would go for (especially if it involved socks), and of course it's a song. But the force that can defeat Voldemort might be some other emotion. Voldemort is the archetypal Evil Overlord, believing himself righteous, all-powerful, etc. etc. So what if he didn't leave Harry's body in the MoM due to the pain of inhabiting such a hunk of burnin' love, but because he couldn't bear Harry's feeling of failure. Of inadequacy. Of guilt. Surely these, as much as love, overwhelm him at the loss of Sirius (when the children are walking through the Prophecy Room isn't there a line in the narration about Harry feeling really embarrassed that he's led them their on a fool's errand?). Perhaps it is Harry's weakness that is, related to V., his strength. V. has devoted his life to overcoming what he perceives as the most unbearable human weakness, that of mortality. Harry's overwhelming sense of failure is dangerous to V. because having survived for so long on will-power alone, he can't cope with the possibility of this sort of inadequacy and vulnerability. You could bring Snape in here, surely a man battling conflicting feelings of superiority and inadequacy if ever there were one. Although personally, I would prefer the triumph of Muggle technology combined with magic, ie. Wingardium Leviosa and a cement mixer. Catherine McK From catherinemck at hotmail.com Wed Nov 26 17:04:19 2003 From: catherinemck at hotmail.com (catherinemckiernan) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:04:19 -0000 Subject: Lupin's Compassion and Draco's Parentage (WAS Re: Lupin/ShortMemory/Boar/Madam/S In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85892 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ceefax2002" wrote: > (snip all the Lupin stuff) > > > Catherine McK: > > > << I'm happy with Narcissa spying on either side - just as long as she > > > gets a good part! And if the blonde hair is a clue that she is a > > > metamorphmagus like her niece, she could be a very good spy indeed! >> > > > > Catlady: > > > Oh, ouch! Then Draco could be a metamorphmagus and his resemblance to > > > Lucius reveal nothing about his paternity. > > > > But Draco couldn't have used his metamorphmagus ability from birth, > and he > > wouldn't have known to make himself look like Lucius. Lucius would > surely > > have been suspicious if "his" new son had, say, bright red hair (no, > I don't > > suspect Arthur of having an affair with Narcissa! although, come to > think of > > it, that could make a good fanfic). Is it possible that Narcissa > could have > > disguised Draco's true appearance somehow, if he isn't Lucius's son? > Any > > magical change might have been difficult if not impossible to hide, but > > there's always good old Muggle hair dye. > > > > Melissa, who thinks Draco most likely is Lucius's son but > appreciates the > > dramatic possibilities if he isn't > > Personally I think Lucius IS Draco's dad, pretty much for the reasons > outlined above, but even if Narcissa had been a bad girl (your > husband's out every night torturing muggles, you get so *bored*, and > that kay*ooot* little squib you hired to prune the roses *will* keep > bending over...), Lucius's the one who's been around for the whole > child raising thing, as is fairly evident from Draco's imprinting. So > finding out his real dad's a paragon of virtue at this stage isn't > going to do a lot of good. > > Ceef. I love "imprinting." Their behaviour is just _so_ alike - espcially in the MoM. I think it's one of the things that makes LM a popular character; we don't see him much, and we don't know much about him, but when we see he's so like Draco we feel we _know_ him. OK, I do. Rather like the metamorphmagus!illegitimate!Draco idea, too, even though I believe it for less time than I believe Evil!Arthur (though not Evil!Molly). Catherine McK From catherinemck at hotmail.com Wed Nov 26 17:04:11 2003 From: catherinemck at hotmail.com (catherinemckiernan) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:04:11 -0000 Subject: Lupin's Compassion and Draco's Parentage (WAS Re: Lupin/ShortMemory/Boar/Madam/S In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85893 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ceefax2002" wrote: > (snip all the Lupin stuff) > > > Catherine McK: > > > << I'm happy with Narcissa spying on either side - just as long as she > > > gets a good part! And if the blonde hair is a clue that she is a > > > metamorphmagus like her niece, she could be a very good spy indeed! >> > > > > Catlady: > > > Oh, ouch! Then Draco could be a metamorphmagus and his resemblance to > > > Lucius reveal nothing about his paternity. > > > > But Draco couldn't have used his metamorphmagus ability from birth, > and he > > wouldn't have known to make himself look like Lucius. Lucius would > surely > > have been suspicious if "his" new son had, say, bright red hair (no, > I don't > > suspect Arthur of having an affair with Narcissa! although, come to > think of > > it, that could make a good fanfic). Is it possible that Narcissa > could have > > disguised Draco's true appearance somehow, if he isn't Lucius's son? > Any > > magical change might have been difficult if not impossible to hide, but > > there's always good old Muggle hair dye. > > > > Melissa, who thinks Draco most likely is Lucius's son but > appreciates the > > dramatic possibilities if he isn't > > Personally I think Lucius IS Draco's dad, pretty much for the reasons > outlined above, but even if Narcissa had been a bad girl (your > husband's out every night torturing muggles, you get so *bored*, and > that kay*ooot* little squib you hired to prune the roses *will* keep > bending over...), Lucius's the one who's been around for the whole > child raising thing, as is fairly evident from Draco's imprinting. So > finding out his real dad's a paragon of virtue at this stage isn't > going to do a lot of good. > > Ceef. I love "imprinting." Their behaviour is just _so_ alike - espcially in the MoM. I think it's one of the things that makes LM a popular character; we don't see him much, and we don't know much about him, but when we see he's so like Draco we feel we _know_ him. OK, I do. Rather like the metamorphmagus!illegitimate!Draco idea, too, even though I believe it for less time than I believe Evil!Arthur (though not Evil!Molly). Catherine McK From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 26 17:11:22 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:11:22 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85894 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > > Hehe, Kneazy: I don't want to be *too* stuffy, but please check your spelling. Berit: > I never said Voldemort is not going to be destroyed! I > just don't think it will happen in a frenzy of hatred from > Harry; "Take that!" *splash* and "take this" *the breaking of bones* > and "serves you right" *splat; tearing out Voldemort's eyes*... Kneasy: Why ever not? Doesn't he deserve it? Berit: > This > is hard. I am not denying book 5-Harry seems to harbour a lot of > hatred in his heart (at the end of book five a lot of it is directed > against Snape). But you must admit the way Rowling writes, she opens > up for another way of defeating Voldemort than just doing it the > Voldemort way? There's too much talk and insinuations about that > mysterious force, the thing Harry has that Voldie hasn't. I'm leaning > more against Harry defeating Voldemort the way he "defeated" him in > MoM: Not cursing him with the AK, but overwhelming Lord Thingy with > his feelings for Sirius; resulting in Voldie having to flee the > scene. Kneasy: But that was not defeat, much less destruction. Voldy made a tactical retreat and he'll be back torturing and killing, just like before. Can't allow that sort of thing to go on indefinitely. It upsets the neighbours. No, he must go through the mincer. Berit: > I am not saying harry will not be in a real fight with > Voldemort trying to use every spell there is (except the unforgivable > ones of course).I can imagine a figthing scene where Harry's magical > skills turn out to be inferior to Voldie's, and where Voldie is about > to finish him off. Then something unexpected happens like in the > graveyard or the MoM scene. That would be consistent with a Rowling's > plot. Kneasy: Why not unforgivable curses? After all they are only unforgivable when used against *people* and Voldy is no longer human. Was it unforgivable when Crouch!Moody used them against spiders? No. And Voldy is no better. JKR can't keep on distracting us like that. It works quite well a time or two, but to keep on dodging the issue right through the entire series would be boring, not to say depressing. In my minds eye I can see millions of teen- agers, storming the bookshops, demanding blood or their money back. Nothing more violent than a teenagers imagination. Berit: > And by the way; New Age-philosophy is certainly NOT my thing :-) I > don't want to be put in that category. You know; the notions of love > and selfless, (non-violent) heroic sacrifice is also a Christian > thought... Kneasy: Oh. Is Harry a Christian? I hadn't realised. Where does it say that? Digging into my memory I seem to recall that Christianity went in more for martyrs rather than heroes. That's what happens when non-violence meets implacable, murderous intent. Well, I'm not certain that Harry is going to survive the series, but at the very least I expect him to take Voldy down at the same time. Harry martyred and Voldy surviving is a totally new take, I must admit. No, I want Voldy's skin to slough off like lumpy, rancid yoghurt, Eldritch screams, choked with blood, Eyeballs that shrivel and smoke, Guts all over the page, (eaten by Lupin in werewolf mode is a bonus) Bones cracking, Ribs splintering with the sound of a stepped-on cockroach, An exploding head, A fuming black heart splitting to leak smoking ichor. There. That should do it. After all, I'm not a violent person. Kneasy From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 17:20:33 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:20:33 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85895 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" wrote: > Check out new info added to timeline and see if you agree. Input > appreciated. > > Marci (down with Lexicon) LOL > > > As for the timeline, it has been broadened a bit and is on the web > > and up for review. I hope you all can take a look and give some > > input. ..edited... > > > > Marci bboy_mn: Molly and Arthur - While this is much debated, the bulk of concensus seems to be for Molly and Arther being in their 70's. They are older than Hagrid who was 63 in CoS; (13 when expelled, CoS is 50 years later; 13+50=63). Molly remembers the caretaker before Hagrid; Ogg. That means Molly was in school before Hagrid was expelled; I think that is for certain. Now the question becomes, how much before Hagrid? Some speculate that Hagrid didn't instantly take over for Ogg, and that's a fair accessment, but I think Hagrid is a pretty hard guy not to spot, and Molly makes no mention of Hagrid at all when she is reminiscing about her old school days. Knowing Harry and Hagrid are good friends, I would think she would have thrown some mention of Hagrid into the conversation. So, my conclusion is that Molly was in school before Hagrid. If there was some overlap in their school years, it was small; eg: Hagrid was starting as Molly was finishing. So, I speculate a difference in their ages to be between 4 and 10 years (although, it could be more than 10). Hagrid in the most recent book, OoP, is about 66, that makes Molly and Arthur between 70 and 76 years old. I do sense that McGonagall is older than Molly, and that keeps me from stretching the age gap between Hagrid and Molly too far. This is something that has been discussed at great length, although, those posts are pretty far back. Harry Potter- He's not in you timeline. Born July 31, 1980. Starts School in Sept. 1991. Charlie Weasley- It would seem that he is 12 or 13 years older than Harry. When Harry starts Hogwarts, Gryffindor hasn't won the Quidditch Cup for seven years; not since Charlie Weasley was Seeker. The question then becomes, when was Charlie Weasley Seeker? Nothing specifically and flatly says it was during his last year at Hogwarts. Although, I honestly think that is a fair assumption. Then comes the question of whether going back seven years in time takes you to the first defeated year, or the last successfull year? There are implications, but I don't know if anything definitively confirms which. I think perhaps the strongest evidence, Syltherin having won 6 consecutive titles, would make 7 years ago, the last winning year for Gryffindor and Charlie's last school year. Expanding further, the 1991/1992 (PS/SS current) school year would be Slythrin's seventh consecutive win. Since the Cup is awared near the end of the school year, I think we count from the end dates. 1992 is the 7th win for Slytherin, 1985/1986 was the first win. That would make 1984/1985 the last year Gryffindor won and Charlie's last year in school. In the year 1985, Charlie is likely 17 about to turn 18 years old. In that same year (1985), Harry is age 5. That creates a 12 year difference between their ages. Harry's birth (1980) minus a 12 year differential (1980-12=1968) equals 1968. This conclusion, is clouded by not knowing the exact dates of everyone's birthday, but I think if we assume that during the school year Charlie was 17 and Harry was 5, we can somewhat ignore those exact birthdates. Best conclusion I can reach; Charlie Weasley was born in 1968. that would make him 24 during Harry's first school year, and 28 during the most recent book (OoP). Side note: the Harry Potter Lexicon confirms my estimate that 1985 was Charlie's last year in School; so 1985 - 17YrsOld = 1968, again confirming 1968 as the correct date. Bill Weasley - It's a safe estimate that Bill is two years older than Charlie; 1968 - 2 = 1966. Bill was probably born in 1966. Side note: Bill says in Gof that he hasn't seen Hogwarts in 5 years, but that by no means implies that 5 years ago was when he graduated. It just happens to be the last time he visited the school. So, this reference can't really be used to establish either Charlie or Bill school years. It's no more significant that the last time I visited the grocery store. Slightly Off-Topic- In your timeline, at the first occurrance of the date 1980, we see several names- "1980 - Ron Weasley (3), Dudley Dursley (6), Harry Potter (7), Neville Longbottom (7), Hermione Granger (9), Draco Malfoy (?)" What do the numbers in parenthesis mean; Ron Weasley (3), etc? Just a few thoughts. bboy_mn From helen at odegard.com Wed Nov 26 17:37:25 2003 From: helen at odegard.com (Helen R. Granberry) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 09:37:25 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Headmaster Ron In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <010201c3b443$f517c4d0$6401a8c0@helenw1> No: HPFGUIDX 85896 this lends credence to a theory I've had since SS/PS which is that Ron (long nose, red hair, easily dismissed kid brother) is the one destined to teach at Hogwarts and eventually become Headmaster. --JDR, whose theory that Voldemort is really Smurf nemesis Gargamel needs just a tiny bit of tweaking to make its acronym work out to VIAGRA... Since SS/PS? I am impressed. The resemblance is too similar to dismiss... most especially the descriptions in PS/SS which I re-reading now. Since first hearing of this theory back in March, I've been a fan of it. Now I am positively convinced. JKR did say one of the kids was destined to teach at Hogwarts... and she also said it wasn't who we might think. Have you seen this? http://www.hp-lexicon.org/16-bertie-bott.jpg Interesting how our venerable Headmaster could have eaten a vomit flavored Every Flavor Bean in his youth... a youth that passed well before they were invented. Helen, Who firmly believes that Weasley is our King ;) http://www.livejournal.com/community/unplottables/4379.html From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 17:40:20 2003 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:40:20 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85897 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: (snip) > Slightly Off-Topic- > In your timeline, at the first occurrance of the date 1980, we see > several names- > > "1980 - Ron Weasley (3), Dudley Dursley (6), Harry Potter (7), Neville > Longbottom (7), Hermione Granger (9), Draco Malfoy (?)" > > What do the numbers in parenthesis mean; Ron Weasley (3), etc? > > Just a few thoughts. > > bboy_mn The numbers are the months in which they were born. Ron in March, Dudley in June (when Harry's letters start arriving, Dudley's month- old video camera birthday present is broken in the second bedroom), Harry in July, etc. Marci (so, Harry was in the Timeline) From susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net Wed Nov 26 17:48:52 2003 From: susiequsie23 at sbcglobal.net (cubfanbudwoman) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:48:52 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85898 Kneasy wrote: > Why not unforgivable curses? After all they are only unforgivable > when used against *people* and Voldy is no longer human. Now Siriusly Snapey Susan: This comes up ALL THE TIME. Can you, Kneasy, or someone else PLEASE enlighten me as to why this is true? I myself have stated that I believe he has chosen a life which is less than truly LIVING...but I cannot get a handle on where people get it that either 1) Voldy is not a human being; or 2) Voldy is immortal. What have I missed? Berit wrote: > > And by the way; New Age-philosophy is certainly NOT my thing :-) > > I don't want to be put in that category. You know; the notions of > > love and selfless, (non-violent) heroic sacrifice is also a > > Christian thought... > > Kneasy responded: > Oh. Is Harry a Christian? I hadn't realised. Where does it say > that? Now Siriusly Snapey Susan: At the risk of speaking *for* Berit, I must say that I don't think Berit was at all making the claim that Harry is a Christian. I believe he was reacting to your labeling "the current outbreak of touchy-feely new age 'don't let's be nasty to Voldemort'" sentiment as "NEW AGE". I think he was simply stating that it's not JUST New Agers who would like this; some Christians would also argue for or be comfortable with no violence, WITHOUT being classed as "New Agers". Quakers & Mennonites, for instance, Christian sects which each have long been proponents of non-violence and whose followers have, thus, been granted conscientious objector status during wars. Siriusly Snapey Susan From AllieS426 at aol.com Wed Nov 26 17:51:49 2003 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:51:49 -0000 Subject: Importance of Incantations (WAS: Neville's broken nose) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85899 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hermowninny719" wrote: > Berit wrote: > I got the impression that if Dolohov could have uttered his spell out > loud, the spell would have been much more powerful. The only reason > Hermione didn't die, was because Dolohov's words were silenced... > > > According to Harry, yes. Which I don't understand in the first place, since there is only one "killing curse," and it's Avada Kedavra- so unless it was that, how *could* it have killed her? Seems to me like a "heart-stopping" curse or something along those lines would also be an unforgivable. Allie From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 17:54:54 2003 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 17:54:54 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85900 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > bboy_mn: > > > Charlie Weasley- > > It would seem that he is 12 or 13 years older than Harry. When Harry > starts Hogwarts, Gryffindor hasn't won the Quidditch Cup for seven > years; not since Charlie Weasley was Seeker. The question then > becomes, when was Charlie Weasley Seeker? Nothing specifically and > flatly says it was during his last year at Hogwarts. Although, I > honestly think that is a fair assumption. > > Then comes the question of whether going back seven years in time > takes you to the first defeated year, or the last successfull year? > There are implications, but I don't know if anything definitively > confirms which. > > I think perhaps the strongest evidence, Syltherin having won 6 > consecutive titles, would make 7 years ago, the last winning year for > Gryffindor and Charlie's last school year. > > Expanding further, the 1991/1992 (PS/SS current) school year would be > Slythrin's seventh consecutive win. Since the Cup is awared near the > end of the school year, I think we count from the end dates. 1992 is > the 7th win for Slytherin, 1985/1986 was the first win. That would > make 1984/1985 the last year Gryffindor won and Charlie's last year in > school. Me: In 9/91, at the feast, Nearly Headless Nick says Slytherin has won the HOUSE cup six years in a row. At the end of the year, 6/92, they (Slytherin) had won it again until Dumbledore hands out last minute points to Harry, Ron, Hermione and Neville, giving the win of the HOUSE cup to Gryffindor. Without Harry in the last match of the year, Ravenclaw won the last game of the year and the QUIDDITCH cup. >In the year 1985, Charlie is likely 17 about to turn 18 years > old. In that same year (1985), Harry is age 5. That creates a 12 year > difference between their ages. Harry's birth (1980) minus a 12 year > differential (1980-12=1968) equals 1968. > > This conclusion, is clouded by not knowing the exact dates of > everyone's birthday, but I think if we assume that during the school > year Charlie was 17 and Harry was 5, we can somewhat ignore those > exact birthdates. > > Best conclusion I can reach; Charlie Weasley was born in 1968. that > would make him 24 during Harry's first school year, and 28 during the > most recent book (OoP). > > Side note: the Harry Potter Lexicon confirms my estimate that 1985 was > Charlie's last year in School; so 1985 - 17YrsOld = 1968, again > confirming 1968 as the correct date. Me: I noticed this as well. This is what I had first. > Bill Weasley - > It's a safe estimate that Bill is two years older than Charlie; 1968 - > 2 = 1966. Bill was probably born in 1966. > > Side note: Bill says in Gof that he hasn't seen Hogwarts in 5 years, > but that by no means implies that 5 years ago was when he graduated. > It just happens to be the last time he visited the school. So, this > reference can't really be used to establish either Charlie or Bill > school years. It's no more significant that the last time I visited > the grocery store. Me: Why not imply that is when he graduated? Why would that summize a visit? For what reason does Bill have to visit Hogwarts? If it can be assumed that he visited, it can also be assumed that is when he graduated. This is why question marks remain with the two oldest Weasley brothers. Marci From t.forch at mail.dk Wed Nov 26 18:07:32 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:07:32 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Headmaster Ron In-Reply-To: <010201c3b443$f517c4d0$6401a8c0@helenw1> References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031126190500.035ab1a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 85901 At 09:37 26-11-03 -0800, you wrote: >this lends credence to a theory I've had since SS/PS which is that Ron >(long nose, red hair, easily dismissed kid brother) is the one destined >to teach at Hogwarts and eventually become Headmaster. Kathleen: Anyway, it's very exciting; we just love Harry Potter, so we're curious - well - first of all we can't wait for books four, five, six and seven [JKR: OK], but after that, we're curious as to whether Harry is going to have a life after Hogwarts? Or if maybe Harry might be a Hogwarts teacher? JKR: Erm, well, because all your kids said hello so nicely in the background there, I'm going to give you information I haven't given anyone else, and I will tell you that one of the characters - er - one of - one of Harry's class mates, though it's not Harry himself, does end up a teacher at Hogwarts, but _it__is__not__maybe__the__one__you'd__think_ - hint, hint, hint! So, yes one of them does end up staying at Hogwarts, but - erm ... Lydon: Does the kids want to have a guess at it, Kathleen? Kathleen: Do you like to have a guess at who it is? Class: Ron Kathleen: They say Ron ... JKR: Noooo - it's not Ron ... Kathleen: [to class] it's not Ron ... JKR: ... because I can't see Ron as a teacher, no way. JKR+Kathleen laughs. Kathleen: Well, we have just been having such a fine time with Harry Potter, and we're /so/ thrilled that you took our call ... JKR: Absolute pleasure ... from an interview with Boston radio show /The Connection/ http://www.hogwarts-library.net/reference/interviews/19991012_TheConnection.html#question38 The page also contains links to the original audio files. Troels From eloiseherisson at aol.com Wed Nov 26 18:04:15 2003 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 13:04:15 EST Subject: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives?) Message-ID: <11f.281e669c.2cf6451f@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85902 Corinth: > First point, we have been given no indication that Snape is an expert > legilimens, only occlumens. The two seem to be completely separate > skills. So I don't find it strange that he wasn't able to figure > these things out. Yes, I was conflating two things as David sweetly managed to point out yesterday without actually saying it. ;-) I guess I just see the one as going with the other. But at the same time, I *do* think that JKR wants us to think that Snape is a Legilimens, though this, of course, could be misdirection. Throughout the other books, we have repeatedly been told that Harry has had the experience of feeling that Snape could read his mind. I don't think his famed ability to put two and two together is only because he is good at deduction. ~Eloise [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From AllieS426 at aol.com Wed Nov 26 18:10:26 2003 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:10:26 -0000 Subject: It may be M.A.D. but it's mine In-Reply-To: <20031126030959.51931.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85903 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, oodaday wrote: > > It would make sense if she were Dumbledore's little sister. Consider their names. We have Albus, Aberforth, and now Arabella. Now, before you start posting about how weak that is, remember the Lucius/Lupin connection Pippin came up with, and the missing "D" child of the Weasley's. > Can someone refresh my memory or point me to the posts? I joined this group a little late in the game (after OoP, gasp!), and I'm not sure what the Lucius/Lupin/missing D child is about. Thanks, Allie From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 18:36:23 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:36:23 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85904 bboy_mn wrote: Bill says in Gof that he hasn't seen Hogwarts in 5 years, but that by no means implies that 5 years ago was when he graduated. It just happens to be the last time he visited the school. So, this reference can't really be used to establish either Charlie or Bill school years. It's no more significant that the last time I visited the grocery store. Marci wrote: Why not imply that is when he graduated? Why would that summize a visit? For what reason does Bill have to visit Hogwarts? If it can be assumed that he visited, it can also be assumed that is when he graduated. Now Hermowninny writes: Perhaps this *tiny* quote can be used in the BB GUN theory currently floating around. What if he graduated in 1984, then had some ever so evil reason to return to Hogwarts in the spring of 1990? Hmmm, what else happened in 1990--Fudge became MoM, Quirrel took a year off (maybe), what else... Hey, maybe Bill filled in for Quirrel when he was gone--but, then again, maybe it was for some much more evil reason! Erin, Oliver, where are you? -Hermowninny From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Wed Nov 26 18:54:16 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:54:16 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Ron In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031126190500.035ab1a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85905 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says Well, shoot... But didn't she say Sirius was really dead? And don't otherwise reasonable people refuse to accept that? I'm sticking with Headmaster Ron. So maybe he doesn't *teach*, maybe he's Quidditch coach or something where you could say he's not technically a "teacher". There's *some* connection or parallel between Ron and Dumbledore, at any rate. That's my crackpot theory, and I'm sticking to it... --JDR From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 26 10:59:26 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 10:59:26 -0000 Subject: It may be M.A.D. but it's mine In-Reply-To: <20031126030959.51931.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85906 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, oodaday wrote: > > Driving home from a long road trip I got to thinking about Mrs. Figg and who she was before she married. We don't know a lot about her except that she is a dotty old lady who was stationed to watch over Harry, probably placed there by Dumbledore. I doubt she lived on Wisteria Walk before Harry arrived at the Dursley's. The thing that struck me as the most odd about her was how did she become a part of the Old Crowd? Since she is a squib, she didn't attend Hogwarts, but obviously knows Dumbledore and has a significant position of trust. > > > > Why would she be a member of the Order in the first place? Being a squib all she can do is blend in with the muggles. A witch or wizard who's taken muggle studies could be used for that. She wasn't useful when Harry got attacked by the Dementors. She didn't have a way to contact The Order until Dung came back. Yes, she communicates with her cats, and she uses them as spies, yet they can't do magic either. But, if she is related to Dumbledore, the head of the Order, I'm sure she has ways to contact family members. > > > > Introducing my M.A.D. theory. Miss Arabella Dumbledore. > > > > It would make sense if she were Dumbledore's little sister. Geoff: I think this is a fascinating thought. I have to admit that I have never stopped to think about one or two oddities concerning her position. She was not known to the Ministry because they don't track squibs (OOTP). So, how come she was linked to the order? (re the instructions to Sirius near the end of GOF). And, again, how come she is sufficiently familiar to them to be used as a "Watchperson" over Harry? (OOTP) I had carefully missed all these little items - I am obviously not destined to become a Sherlock Holmes type in my dotage. but, as you say, it implies a connection somewhere; I think that Arabella Figg must certainly be related to somebody involved in VW1, if not Dumbledore himself. Intriguing. Geoff From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Wed Nov 26 12:48:54 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 12:48:54 +0000 Subject: Chess Theory Message-ID: <3FC4A136.2030409@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85907 I did a quick search, but couldn't see anything detailing this idea. A couple of weeks ago, Lycoris posted a theory to her LJ detailing the possible relationship between the game of Chess in PS/SS and the whole of the books. This builds on those posts, including what I added to the idea. I'd been playing around with the chess metaphor myself, but got to nothing like the complexity that Lycoris manages. The Game The first thing that strikes me is the chilling metaphor between the chess game and life. When Harry walks into the chess room, the pieces have all healed themselves, and returned to their original positions just as if nothing has happened. If Evil is White and Good is Dark, it shows that the war will continue as if the battle has never happened, as the pieces are faceless - there are no details, just that one side has to win, and then they're all back to how they were. In part, it's also a metaphor for death - Harry experiences losing Ron, and having to go on without him not knowing if he's still alive. In much the same way Sirius' death evokes a similar response. Harry has to go on with the game, whether he likes it or not. Chess can be seen as a metaphor for life - for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, although there will evidently be individual perturbations. The DEs being white is a curious thing, as white initially suggests purity, sterility even. But consider - the likes of Lucius seem to exist quite openly, in the light. Perhaps better is to look at the trajectories of the different pieces. The Pieces Canon gives us the positions of Harry, Ron and Hermione from the chess game. I'm assuming that the three of them begin as the King side pieces. The second column is the list of pawns Black Rook Hermione Knight Ron Neville Bishop Harry Ginny Weasley King Dumbledore Cedric Diggory Queen McGonagall Rubeus Hagrid Bishop Snape Knight Sirius Rook Lupin White Rook Barty Crouch Jnr Knight Rookwood OR Dolohov Ludo Bagman Bishop Lucius Malfoy Peter Pettigrew Queen Bellatrix King Voldemort Quirrell Bishop Draco Malfoy Knight Rodolphus Lestrange Rook Millicent Bulstrode In chess, the great thing about Pawns is that they can be turned into Queens, or indeed, any other piece on the back row. The interesting thing is that white starts, and in starting can dictate to Black the roles of particular pieces in particular which of Harry and Neville will be the chosen adversary of Voldemort. Ultimately of course it is Harry that checkmates the black king in PS/SS, albeit with the assistance of Hermione and Ron. I believe that all the pieces are now on the board, in the series, we just don't know their precise positions. Going through this, piece by piece: Black Rook: Hermione Hermione tends to think in straight lines Straight A student, emotionally intelligent, but not brilliant at political manoeuvring. She's unsubtle when it comes to the Elf Liberation Front, and only succeeds in upsetting the creatures. If she castled with Dumbledore, then she becomes central to the game, while AD puts himself in a safe position, able to influence play, without actually running the risk of checkmates. He would be unlikely to castle with Lupin, although pieces work best as a team, and Lupin would probably work well with Hermione, once Snape and Harry were out onto the open game. Black Rook: Lupin This is only supposition, but if were seeing the loyal Marauders as the counterpart to the modern trio, then it makes sense to have Remus as the Rook. Hes a fairly straight forward character, powerful in his own right, but he struggles with group politics as JKR said, hes too grateful for having friends, and overlooks some of the things they do to him. Black Bishops: Harry and Snape So similar in nature, and yet so very different. Complementary pieces, complex men. One operates in the shadows, the other in the light. Never destined to reside on the same square, yet each vital to the effectiveness of the other. Both need the King in order to effect a proper checkmate, unable to undo Voldemort entirely on their own, although each is powerful in his own right, and able to control and manipulate huge swathes of the board. Black Knights: Sirius and Ron Partly because of the shock of the Knight being taken, I put Sirius down as the black knight, counterpart to Ron. They operate in similar territory with relation to Harry the friend and guide. Both are inventive characters that dont quite operate on straight lines. Ron isnt daft, and seems to genuinely appreciate brains. Sirius is one of the brightest of his year. They seem to have a lot in common. Others have dealt with the similarities between the two. Dumbledore as the Black King may seem obvious, but is actually quite interesting. The king in chess cant move very far, yet has a profound influence on the rest of the game, because its him theyre ultimately seeking to protect. McGonagall as the Black Queen, again, she seems to be skilled politically (OOTP) magically (animagus) and in her personal life. She seems to have a large sphere of influence, assuming that the deputy of Hogwarts is as well thought of as the Head. The Pawns Neville Longbottom Whats intriguing about this is that Either Neville or Harry could have been the pawn that eventually becomes a queen after 7 moves (7 books). The position of Harry and Neville in the great game is eventually decided by LV, not they themselves. Pawns can only take obliquely, and thats what Neville seems to do. Hes a constant presence in the series, without actually doing very much, bar melting cauldrons. However the melting cauldrons seem to provide useful plot points. Cedric Diggory The opening gambit, effectively put forward by Mad Eye Moody!Crouch. The one put forward to see how serious this game really is. Hes down as the Kings pawn, because by going, he exposes Harry. Ginny Weasley Pawns can be quite influential, and shes really coming into her own as the books progress. A queen in the making. Unlike Hermione, who is already fixed in a place, Ginny can be whatever the board most needs at the time she reaches the final square. This could be someone for Harry, or for Neville, or one of the other pawns. Rubeus Hagrid The pawn that protects the King and Queen (OOTP) and is likely never to reach the final square, but will prove important in the run of the game. Dumbledore says he would trust Rubeus with his life, which suggests that he is the Queens Pawn. Grawp/Firenze/Dobby/A.N.Goblin Shows the fa(r)ce of unity of the magical brethren. WHITE Ive found these far more difficult to categorise. The King and Queen are fairly obvious Bellatrixs statement of intent in GOF makes her role obvious. Voldemort is of course a given. Arguments can be made for the different characters playing different roles. The Malfoys as Bishops, and Bishops pawn works, as a contrast to Snape and Harry. Lucius operates in the light, Snape in the darkness. Draco and Harry play on the same colour, fighting the same territory. (Pansy?) The definite pawns are Quirrel and Peter. The Rooks are Crouch Junior and Millicent. Millicent, because shes set up in the first book as agonist to Hermione, and this raises its ugly head in OOTP with the IS capturing the DA. Not Pansy, because I think shes being set up for other things. (Then again, I read Muggle Studies. Im biased.) Crouch Junior because hes blinkered by his loyalty. Works in disguise, but is unable to see beyond his face. Knights Im veering towards Dolohov (on the evidence of the department of mysteries and Rookwood (on the evidence of Harrymort). Mr Lestrange doesnt seem particularly interesting, much in the shadows of his wife and is probably her pawn, ready to be sacrificed. Ludo Bagman, I have as a pawn someone to be sacrificed as necessary. What this metaphor says for the game itself? Snarry is out they never move on the same square. Theyd work well as a team, but not as a couple. It is possible to read Snarry into this analysis as well, using the same reasoning, I suppose Harry/Hermione they dont move in the same plane often enough. Harry will skip around the board its what makes him good at DADA, but Im not sure that he and Hermione would be in the right place often enough Harry/Ron, Ron/Hermione both possible the Knight is complementary to both of them, and (as noted about GoF) and smooths the two to work as a team. Harry/Ginny Possible we dont know the likely development of Ginny. Sirius/Snape again, possible, but theyre so much in the habit of annoying each other that a retrospective love affair wont happen. My betting is that Harry will think that Ron is dead, and have to go on to face LV alone. That knowledge will mean that he has the power and the recklessness to win look how he defeats LVs attempt to possess him in OOTP he doesnt fear death, therefore he can take the risks he needs to take. Pansy and Luna dont fit into this analysis Im wondering if Pansy is being set up as the good Slytherin, and Im not sure about Luna. Zach is another one that Im not sure of. Comments appreciated Angel of the North From fakeplastikcynic at hotmail.com Wed Nov 26 18:24:46 2003 From: fakeplastikcynic at hotmail.com (Martha) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 18:24:46 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85908 Kneasy, in message 85883: >As an enthusiastic afficianado of gore-splattered mayhem I am under- whelmed, nay, distressed by the current outbreak of touchy-feely new age 'don't let's be nasty to Voldemort.' It seems that although he and his enthusiastic band of supremacist murderers have slaughtered uncounted innocents over the years, all his sins will be wiped out by the goodness in Harry's heart. >I can believe that this unknown power in Harry might save him (again!) from Voldemort, just as it did in the Ministry, but I don't believe it can change Voldemort in a Scrooge-like conversion accompanied by soaring strings and a heavenly choir. Martha: Kneasy, I'm with you on the happy-clappy ending. The idea that Harry does something noble, or brave, or generous or whatever, melts Voldie's heart, and then they all go and party with the Ewoks is a bit - well - sentimental, and pretty repugnant IMO. I just don't buy it. Voldemort's been doing evil for decades. I refuse to accept that he'll change all that because Harry - his arch-enemy, arguably - does something nice. What's he going to do? Give him flowers? However... I'm also unsure about this whole gore-splattered mayhem thing. As Berit says: >I just don't think it will happen in a frenzy of hatred from Harry; "Take that!" *splash* and "take this" *the breaking of bones* and "serves you right" *splat; tearing out Voldemort's eyes*... To which Kneasy replied: > Why ever not? Doesn't he deserve it? Martha: Possibly he does deserve it. But as a reader of novels - that is, I read these books because I enjoy them - I'm not sure that would satisfy me. Harry goes through years and years of being the good guy fighting the bad guy and then at the end, there is an even bigger battle scene with even more explosions and then it's all over? Again - I don't buy it. To borrow from Berit again: >But you must admit the way Rowling writes, she opens up for another way of defeating Voldemort than just doing it the Voldemort way? ... And, at risk of making this a pointless post, I agree completely. I don't think JKR would spend however long - five years, if my memory serves me correctly, five years before publication - planning out a seven-book cycle that will end with just another battle and a "bang you're dead". I'm inclined to think that defeat will come through something unexpected, and is more likely to involve one of those things worse than death that Dumbledore refers to than death itself, and that this is likely to be a thing-worse-than-death that's personal to Voldemort. What this is likely to be I have no idea, but I don't think it's having your entrails Accio'd (not matter how cool the phrase "Accio entrails!" is.) :-) It's one thing if Harry has to be the one to destroy Voldemort, but I don't like the idea that he has to become a cold-blooded killer in order to do so. He wouldn't allow Sirius and Lupin to kill Wormtail in PoA and I don't think he'll happily kill Voldemort either. I don't think he'll learn to be a nasty, mean person so he can effectively throw AK or the Cruciatus curse. I think when it comes down to it he'll win because he's good and he's not evil. What would be the point if Harry won, but in doing so had more or less become Voldemort? To go off on a tangent, one of the moments in OoP that really grabbed me was when Harry is kicking off in Dumbledore's office, and he shouts, "I don't want to be human!" (no books handy, apologies). At the end of the day, Tom Riddle chose not to be human, and I'm hoping Harry will choose to carry on being human. Kneasy wants: >Voldy's skin to slough off like lumpy, rancid yoghurt, Eldritch screams, choked with blood, Eyeballs that shrivel and smoke, Guts all over the page, (eaten by Lupin in werewolf mode is a bonus) Bones cracking, Ribs splintering with the sound of a stepped-on cockroach, An exploding head, A fuming black heart splitting to leak smoking ichor. Martha: OK, I admit, all that is pretty cool. Especially the "eaten by werewolf" bit. Is it OK if I have a feather boa but it's pink and glittery and I bought it in a toy shop and I just own it without actually waving it? :-) From bibphile at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 19:11:17 2003 From: bibphile at yahoo.com (bibphile) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:11:17 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85909 > bboy_mn wrote: > Bill says in Gof that he hasn't seen Hogwarts in 5 years, but that by > no means implies that 5 years ago was when he graduated. It just > happens to be the last time he visited the school. So, this reference > can't really be used to establish either Charlie or Bill school > years. It's no more significant that the last time I visited the > grocery store. > Marci wrote: > Why not imply that is when he graduated? Why would that summize a > visit? For what reason does Bill have to visit Hogwarts? If it can > be assumed that he visited, it can also be assumed that is when he > graduated. > I don't think so, Marci. Charlie is younger than Bill. If Bill had graduated 5 years ago, Charlie would have had to graduate the year before Harry started. In PS Fred said they hadn't won the Quidditch cup since Charlie left. Id Charlie had just left he's badically be saying "We haven't won the Quidditch cup since last year." That makes no sense becuase that was the last opportunity to win the Quidditch cup. bibphile From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 19:11:52 2003 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:11:52 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Ron In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85910 "jdr0918" wrote: > << wrote: ...JKR: Noooo - it's not Ron ... > Kathleen: [to class] it's not Ron ... > JKR: ... because I can't see Ron as a teacher, no way...>>> > > The Sergeant Majorette says > > Well, shoot... But didn't she say Sirius was really dead? And don't > otherwise reasonable people refuse to accept that? I'm sticking with > Headmaster Ron. So maybe he doesn't *teach*, maybe he's Quidditch > coach or something where you could say he's not technically > a "teacher". There's *some* connection or parallel between Ron and > Dumbledore, at any rate. > > That's my crackpot theory, and I'm sticking to it... > > --JDR I like your crackpot theory of the Albus/Ron parallel. They are both tall redheads. Okay, Albus hair is silver, but it was auburn once. Marci (who believes in the future greatness of Ron!) From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 19:18:43 2003 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:18:43 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85911 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bibphile" wrote: > > > bboy_mn wrote: > > Bill says in Gof that he hasn't seen Hogwarts in 5 years, but that > by > > no means implies that 5 years ago was when he graduated. It just > > happens to be the last time he visited the school. So, this > reference > > can't really be used to establish either Charlie or Bill school > > years. It's no more significant that the last time I visited the > > grocery store. > > > Marci wrote: > > Why not imply that is when he graduated? Why would that summize a > > visit? For what reason does Bill have to visit Hogwarts? If it > can > > be assumed that he visited, it can also be assumed that is when he > > graduated. > > > > I don't think so, Marci. Charlie is younger than Bill. If Bill had > graduated 5 years ago, Charlie would have had to graduate the year > before Harry started. > > In PS Fred said they hadn't won the Quidditch cup since Charlie > left. Id Charlie had just left he's badically be saying "We haven't > won the Quidditch cup since last year." That makes no sense becuase > that was the last opportunity to win the Quidditch cup. > > bibphile ME: I just finished reading PS again. I came across Slytherin winning the House cup six years in a row. No mention of them not winning since Charlie left. Only mentioning is that Harry is a 'better' seeker. I think he says something along those lines in POA though. See why I needed input? LOL Marci From helen at odegard.com Wed Nov 26 19:20:23 2003 From: helen at odegard.com (Helen R. Granberry) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 11:20:23 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Headmaster Ron In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <012601c3b452$57be8ed0$6401a8c0@helenw1> No: HPFGUIDX 85912 "jdr0918" wrote: > << wrote: ...JKR: Noooo - it's not Ron ... > Kathleen: [to class] it's not Ron ... > JKR: ... because I can't see Ron as a teacher, no way...>>> > > The Sergeant Majorette says > > Well, shoot... But didn't she say Sirius was really dead? And don't > otherwise reasonable people refuse to accept that? I'm sticking with > Headmaster Ron. So maybe he doesn't *teach*, maybe he's Quidditch > coach or something where you could say he's not technically > a "teacher". There's *some* connection or parallel between Ron and > Dumbledore, at any rate. > > That's my crackpot theory, and I'm sticking to it... > > --JDR I like your crackpot theory of the Albus/Ron parallel.? They are both tall redheads.? Okay, Albus hair is silver, but it was auburn once. Marci (who believes in the future greatness of Ron!) I am with you guys too... if you listen to the audio... those kids sprung that on her. She didn't quite tell a lie.... ;) Dumbledore is the teacher. Ron becomes a professor, yet doesn't ;) From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Wed Nov 26 19:36:18 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:36:18 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85913 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cubfanbudwoman" wrote: > Kneasy wrote: > > Why not unforgivable curses? After all they are only unforgivable > > when used against *people* and Voldy is no longer human. > > Now Siriusly Snapey Susan: > This comes up ALL THE TIME. Can you, Kneasy, or someone else PLEASE > enlighten me as to why this is true? I myself have stated that I > believe he has chosen a life which is less than truly LIVING...but I > cannot get a handle on where people get it that either 1) Voldy is > not a human being; or 2) Voldy is immortal. What have I missed? > Pleased to. You must have skipped over it somehow. GoF, graveyard scene, Voldy addressing the returned DEs. 1. "They, who knew the steps I took, long ago, to guard myself against mortal death." 2. "My curse was deflected by the womans foolish sacrifice, and it rebounded upon me. Aaaah.... pain beyond pain, my friends; nothing could have prepared me for it. I was ripped from my body, I was less than spirit, less than the meanest ghost....but still I was alive. What I was, even I do not know...I who have gone further than anybody along the path that leads to immortality. You know my goal - to conquer death. And now, I was tested, and it appeared that one or more of my experiments had worked... for I had not been killed, though the curse should have done it. [....] for I had no body and every spell which might have helped me required the use of a wand." Earlier,in his pre-cauldron phase Voldy is also described as 'creature' and 'the thing'. There is no hint of human-ness. So, we have an evil emanation (not even spirit, let alone mind) with no body, that has survived an AK (which is not possible for a mortal.) Whatever constructs he inhabits from Godrics Hollow on, whether 'the thing', rats, Quirrell or the stew in the cauldron, Voldy is at best a parasitic evil force that cannot be considered to be human but is damn near immortal. Based on what he says, I'll bet that his current body could be destroyed and his evil would *still* exist. A nice problem if you want to get rid of him for good. Tom Riddle in CoS is not 'real' - he is an expression from the diary and vanishes with its destruction, though Ginny's spirit and life force would have given him substance. Kneasy From witchywoman at obdb.net Wed Nov 26 09:30:04 2003 From: witchywoman at obdb.net (Tammy) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 04:30:04 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ravenclaw Mascot-Challenging Lexicon References: Message-ID: <009201c3b3ff$dffb8120$99960144@home> No: HPFGUIDX 85914 ----- Original Message ----- Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ravenclaw Mascot-Challenging Lexicon Arya Wrote: > I see on the Lexicon that Ravenclaw's house mascot is listed as the Eagle > and not a Raven. I am searching for canon to confirm the true mascot of the > House. Does anyone have any references they can point me towards that I > am missing and not recalling? I know this doesn't come from the book but this does come from the book website at http://www.scholastic.com/harrypotter/reference/index.htm: Ravenclaw house One of the four school houses in Hogwarts. Founded by Rowena Ravenclaw. The Ravenclaw symbol is an eagle. The resident ghost is the Grey Lady. P.S. You learn something everyday because I've been racking my brain trying to remember who the Ravenclaw ghost was. I don't remember it being mentioned. I know it probably was but I just don't remember it. Tammy From gwharrison53 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 15:41:32 2003 From: gwharrison53 at yahoo.com (gwharrison53) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 15:41:32 -0000 Subject: Snape's Fury/The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives?/Poor snape In-Reply-To: <000901c3b39e$8915d560$9f4c5451@ATM> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85915 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Alexandra Vieira" wrote: > I'm sorry this turned out to be a "poor-snape" post but I really wanted to > say this and know if somebody shares my feelings about Snape. I know Eloise > probably does ;-) HI! I have always liked Snape, & I really don't know WHY ? But even with him being on the good side (now), I think he still does things for his self. Like at the Shack - - - he was going to get even with those who had mocked him when they were all youger. Then in #5, he is not really helping H P stop Lord V, but making it easier, so that H P will get in trouble & then HE/Snape will help him ! Gail From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 19:41:35 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:41:35 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85916 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > bboy_mn: > > > Bill Weasley - > > > > Side note: Bill says in Gof that he hasn't seen Hogwarts in 5 > > years, but that by no means implies that 5 years ago was when he > > graduated. It just happens to be the last time he visited the > > school. So, this reference can't really be used to establish > > either Charlie or Bill school years. It's no more significant > > that the last time I visited the grocery store. > > Me (Marci): > Why not imply that is when he graduated? Why would that summize a > visit? For what reason does Bill have to visit Hogwarts? If it can > be assumed that he visited, it can also be assumed that is when he > graduated. > > This is why question marks remain with the two oldest Weasley > brothers. > > Marci bboy_mn: Why would Bill be there 5 years ago? Why was he there in GoF when he made that comment? There wasn't any evil or sinister purpose to him being there during GoF, why would anyone assume his previous visit was so? (comment to the thread in general) Maybe he came for a quidditch match. Maybe one of his brothers was doing something (good or bad) and that motivated him. Maybe Molly had to come to the school for some reason and once again, Bill accompanied her. Maybe he was sent there on banking business? Maybe he stopped into The Three Broomsticks with a friend to quaff a few ales and decided to stroll the grounds for old time sake. There could be a near endless list of normal and reasonable excuses for Bill to have visited Hogwarts. Just a thought. bboy_mn From grannybat at hotmail.com Wed Nov 26 19:49:09 2003 From: grannybat at hotmail.com (grannybat84112) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:49:09 -0000 Subject: It may be M.A.D. but it's mine In-Reply-To: <20031126030959.51931.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85917 Dooda bravely surfaced with a new, really cool theory: > > I got to thinking about Mrs. Figg and who she was before she married. ...how did she become a part of the Old Crowd? Since she is a squib, she didn't attend Hogwarts, but obviously knows Dumbledore and has a significant position of trust. > > Why would she be a member of the Order in the first place? Being a squib all she can do is blend in with the muggles. A witch or wizard who's taken muggle studies could be used for that. She wasn't useful when Harry got attacked by the Dementors. She didn't have a way to contact The Order until Dung came back. Yes, she communicates with her cats, and she uses them as spies, yet they can't do magic either. > > Introducing my M.A.D. theory. Miss Arabella Dumbledore. > > It would make sense if she were Dumbledore's little sister. Consider their names. We have Albus, Aberforth, and now Arabella. ... * And * Harry says she's a "mad old lady." :o) (ss/ps pg 22 scholastic). "He's a genius! But he is a bit mad, yes." I love this. Not only does it give big-brother Albus a personal investment in the progressive, Muggle-friendly ideals to which he's committed, but this theory supports my idea that Arabella Figg will become Harry's summertime source for information about the Magical world. After that deadly fiasco in the Dept. of Mysteries, it's unlikely that Dumbledore will again chose to leave Harry in the dark about strategic decisions that affect Harry personally. Dumbledore can't afford to spend all his time until September 1 keeping Harry updated on the state of his war tactics, let alone explaining the past; that job is most easily given to the person who's already stationed nearest to Privet Drive. >From my first read of OOP I've strongly suspected that Harry will be spending a lot of teatime at Mrs. Figg's house in the initial chapters of Book 6...and that she will not only tell him a great deal about her brother's involvement with the Potters, but she will also impart to Harry some very unpleasant truths about how Squibs are treated in Magical society. Grannybat From kcawte at ntlworld.com Thu Nov 27 04:15:25 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:15:25 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) References: Message-ID: <004d01c3b49d$255c3190$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 85918 > > bboy_mn: > > Why would Bill be there 5 years ago? Why was he there in GoF when he > made that comment? There wasn't any evil or sinister purpose to him > being there during GoF, why would anyone assume his previous visit was > so? (comment to the thread in general) > K Would five years ago be in line with the Twins getting a place on the Quidditch Team? Because I could definitely see him (and maybe Charlie too) coming back to see that. On a related note Ginny makes a comment about wanting to go to Hogwarts since Bill got his letter - is that even possible? Would she have been born when Bill was 11? K "The Loudest Noise Comes From The Electric Minerva." From iris_ft at yahoo.fr Wed Nov 26 20:19:55 2003 From: iris_ft at yahoo.fr (iris_ft) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:19:55 -0000 Subject: Chess Theory In-Reply-To: <3FC4A136.2030409@cantab.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85919 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Angel Moules wrote: > I did a quick search, but couldn't see anything detailing this idea. > > A couple of weeks ago, Lycoris posted a theory to her LJ detailing the > possible relationship between the game of Chess in PS/SS and the whole > of the books. This builds on those posts, including what I added to the > idea. I'd been playing around with the chess metaphor myself, but got to > nothing like the complexity that Lycoris manages. > Iris now: Your post is wonderful, and easy to understand. Great work! > The Game > > The first thing that strikes me is the chilling metaphor between the > chess game and life. Iris: Right. And there's also a parallel between the chess game in PS/SS and the fourth book of the series. >When Harry walks into the chess room, the pieces > have all healed themselves, and returned to their original positions > just as if nothing has happened. If Evil is White and Good is Dark, it > shows that the war will continue as if the battle has never happened, as > the pieces are faceless - there are no details, just that one side has > to win, and then they're all back to how they were. Now me: Exactly. Harry defeated Voldemort when he was a baby but it didn't change anything in the way the WW's organisation. The result of that inertia is the new raise of Voldemort, that will probably be defeated twice but will come back again and again (he or another Dark Lord, the name doesn't really matter, the Beast is still the Beast)if nothing changes this time. Now look at what happens in Book 4. At the end of GoF, the WW acts just as if nothing had happened during the last task of the Tournament. > > In part, it's also a metaphor for death - Harry experiences losing Ron, > and having to go on without him not knowing if he's still alive. In much > the same way Sirius' death evokes a similar response. Harry has to go on > with the game, whether he likes it or not. Iris: "That"s chess, says Ron in Book 1,"You've got to make some sacrifices!" And we can say that the chess game in PS/SS is a metaphor of what happens in GoF. Harry looses temporarily Ron as a friend. The scenes in the graveyard are scenes of human sacrifice. Cedric is murdered, Wortail has to give his flesh and Harry has to give his blood. > Chess can be seen as a metaphor for life - for every action there is an > equal and opposite reaction, although there will evidently be individual > perturbations. Iris: In GoF, it works exactly like that. One example: for Harry and Cedric acting loyally, there is Moody/Crouch Jr acting as a traitor. As for the "individual perturbations", we can take the example of Harry'psychological suffering. By the way, does Voldemort suffer because of Harry's blood running through his veins? I hope so... > The DEs being white is a curious thing, as white initially suggests > purity, sterility even. But consider - the likes of Lucius seem to exist > quite openly, in the light. (skip) Iris: You give yourself the explanation: white suggests purity and sterility. Now who are the Death Eaters? They are purebloods, obsessed with their pure lineage. Just the kind of behaviour that leads to sterility (not only biological, but also cultural, psychological, etc). And you add in your post that the White pieces always play first. It's what happens in GoF: the Death Eaters play first, and so does Evil. At the end of the book, we realize that the whole action has been manipulated by Voldemort. He always anticipated his action, he always played first. (Big big skip), because I don't have the time to comment what you write about the pieces. I 'd just want to know something. You call Hermione "the Rook", but JKr calls her "the Castle" in PS/SS (Bloomsbury paperback). Which word do chess players use more oftenly? Thanks for your post and for the help it provides, Amicalement, Iris From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Wed Nov 26 20:20:38 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:20:38 -0000 Subject: Chess Theory In-Reply-To: <3FC4A136.2030409@cantab.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85920 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Angel Moules wrote: > > The Game > > The first thing that strikes me is the chilling metaphor between the > chess game and life. When Harry walks into the chess room, the pieces > have all healed themselves, and returned to their original positions > just as if nothing has happened. If Evil is White and Good is Dark, A short comment: If this is a reference to the chess game from book 1, than white isn't evil. It just seems so, because the trio played with the black figures. But the white site is the one who protected the stone. Therefore, it is the good side. Quirrell had to play with black, too. > In part, it's also a metaphor for death - Harry experiences losing Ron, > and having to go on without him not knowing if he's still alive. In much > the same way Sirius' death evokes a similar response. Harry has to go on > with the game, whether he likes it or not. I agree. Harry has to continue, no matter how much it costs. > > The Pieces > > Canon gives us the positions of Harry, Ron and Hermione from the chess > game. I'm assuming that the three of them begin as the King side pieces. No matter which part he played in the chess game in PS, Harry is the king. He is the one, who must be protected to all costs. The moment the King (Harry) is killed, Voldemort has won the game. The only other (but less likely) alternative for the King is Neville, as the other prophecy boy. Dumbledore would be the queen, the most powerful figure. Hickengruendler From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 20:22:14 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:22:14 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Bill Weasley is Ever So Evil parts 1 & 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85921 Here was Erin, back AGAIN at the Royal George, and becoming increasingly worried that she ought to be getting back to the Imperius!Arthur trimaran. Her shore leave had only been approved for last night, and it was now nearly 11 a.m. the next morning. But no sooner had she wet her whistle and begun to think about heading for her rowboat, than she was deluged by a small crowd, all wanting details on her new Evil!Bill theory. Bowing to crowd pressure, Erin took out her shiny BB GUN (Bitter Bill Goes Undeniably Nefarious) and began to explain how it worked. A few minutes into her explanation, she heard a small noise from behind her, a sort of... "Hem, hem." Erin whirled around and saw, with a thrill of dread, Abigail, acting captain on the trimaran, clothed in a tea-stained nightdress, rubber boots, and her trademark many-pocketed overcoat. "So...What's this about Bill then, Erin?" asks Abigail. The pit of Erin's stomach performs an awful flip-flop, but she proceeds to try and brazen it out. "Oh, hello, Abigail!" she answers brightly. "Isn't it exciting? There've been some quite positive reactions so far. Do you want to hear about it?" Without waiting for a reply, she launches into a rather exhaustive explanation, hoping to forestall the inevitable questions. Abigail listens silently as she eats. Just before Erin can move on to the third part of her theory, Abigail speaks at last. "In general, I like the idea of the modern betrayer being a contemporary of Harry (relatively speaking), rather then a contemporary of his parents. "However, I have to question some of your canon. I think you may be casting too wide a net. For example, take your analysis of Bill's clothes." "That's right." Erin replies, getting comfortable in her seat. "Bill dresses like a disaffected teenager. What kind of behavior is this for a man already in his twenties, with a respectable job?" Abigail frowns. "Bill works for a bank, but he isn't a banker. He's a curse-breaker. He doesn't work out of an office, meeting with clients, but in the dusty Egyptian desert. His job includes venturing into dangerous places. sealed against all who might encroach, seeking treasure." Abigail turns to Erin with a smirk. "Don't you see, Erin? Bill is Indiana Jones." Erin, who was taking a sip of her drink, begins to cough it up, and Abigail spends a few minutes slapping her back. "Indiana Jones!" Erin yells. "Indiana Jones! No way! Indiana Jones gives his findings to museums! Didn't you hear my argument about how in the muggle world, there are laws against what Bill is doing? That treasure properly belongs to the country of Egypt, not to some private bank. Those Goblins are probably melting down priceless artifacts just to make more galleons. Cleopatra's tomb is never gonna be found, thanks to Bill! And even if you point out that wizards aren't bound by muggle laws, what about possible descendants of those old Egyptian wizards? In a society where Ollivander's family has owned the *same* wand shop for over 2,000 years, you can't tell me there's no way to trace these people. "Indians Jones, pshaw. More like one of his baddie archaeologist rivals. And when did you ever see Harrison Ford wearing black, anyway? Black wouldn't work out in the dusty Egyptian desert. It'd be too hot, and it would be coated with dust within seconds, making it look awful. No these clothes must be special ones Bill saves for when he's in England. And he wears them to dinner especially to bug his mother. At Erin's words, Abigail assumes a pained expression. "Are you sure you want to do that, Erin?" she asks. "Walk into the Weasley Family Dynamics morass? Specifically, the unplottable depths of the Molly's Mothering Skills Swamp, now with extra quicksand!" "But I'm not talking about Molly here." Erin insists. "I'm talking about Bill intentionally dressing to upset her." "Is he?" Abigail's eyes are wide. "Some people might see Molly as babying him. They might conclude that Bill might indeed be dressing to annoy his mother, but that this is a reaction to her own behavior. And the thing is, I don't even see that dynamic at play. Bill's behavior at the dinner is completely calm. He reacts to his mother's nagging with bemusement. He is neither annoyed, nor is he actively trying to annoy." "Oh, is that how you read that scene?" says Erin. "I agree that was the way that Harry saw it, but you know, we can't always trust Harry's viewpoint on these things. Let's look at what really happened. "Molly bugs Bill about the earring. He tells her, in no uncertain terms, to back off, using a swearword in the process. Harry may hear that calm, quiet tone as "patient", but patience and cursing just don't go together. I hear it as a sinister warning. And Molly hears the same thing. She backs down immediately, changes the subject faster than you can say "Lumos". No last arguments. Not a single word of recrimination about the swearing, though she wouldn't let any other child get away with it. "But there's a problem. Even though she's changed the subject, she's still annoying Bill. So Ginny, recognizing the warning signs, steps in and speaks for him before he explodes." "And haven't you ever wondered why Molly always takes Percy as an example for the twins when she could impress them much more by taking Bill? After all, he was Head Boy too, and he's a lot cooler than Percy. There's just something wrong with Bill, and his family can sense it." "I don't believe that has anything to do with Bill, actually." Abigail says, as she begins searching through her pockets. "Tell me, have you visited The Stubby Boardman Modern Art Wing at the Canon Museum recently?" Finally, Abigail finds what she was looking for. She hands Erin a slightly grubby, much folded and refolded, formerly glossy brochure announcing an art exhibit. "The Next Generational Parallels." Erin reads. "I heard about this. What does it have to do with Bill?" "Look at the artist's notes in the back." Abigail prods. "The bit about Ron right there." >>The Weasley children seem to fall into two camps. The Charlie camp, which seems to include Fred, George and Ginny, is more rambunctious, less concerned with rules, more physical and has interests that lean towards the dangerous and irreverent. The Bill camp, which includes Percy and Ron, tends to be more responsible. They have positions of authority both in and out of Hogwarts, and tend to be more concerned about propriety. (The two groups are also apparently divided by body types - Bill and his group are taller and thinner, whereas Charlie and his group are shorter and stockier.)>> "Now, given your claim that Bill is Ever So Evil, we might as well re- title the two camps Molly and Arthur." Abigail explains. "Arthur is an intelligent, responsible man, but we all know that he's given to flights of whimsy, and is capable of being quite silly. He thinks very little of appearances, and tends to have a more permissive outlook. Molly, on the other hand, is quite concerned with propriety and the appearance of it, and seems more aware of financial concerns then her husband (but then, that may be more a function of her role in the home). Each of the Weasley children show characteristics of both their parents, but to differing degrees. Fred and George, for example, are super-Arthur, with very little Molly. Ron, Ginny, Bill and Charlie are a rather even mix, each leaning a little bit towards one of their parents. Of all the children, Percy is the only one who favors Molly completely - in fact, like the twins with their father, we might call him super-Molly." "Wait a minute!" Erin interrupts. "I agree with you about the two camps of children. Yes, I see that. But you would link the Bill camp with Molly and the Charlie one with Arthur? Oh, no, that's not how I see it at all. In fact, if we're going by physical type, it's exactly the opposite. Molly is the short one, just like Charlie, the twins, and Ginny. Arthur is tall, mild-mannered, and calm, like Bill, Percy and Ron. Molly's group are the firebrands, just like Molly herself. She might be all gung-ho about the rules now, but that's very often a symptom of a misspent youth, such as sneaking out and about at three in the morning with her boyfriends. I think she fights with the twins so often not because they are two separate personality types, but because they are so much alike. she likes Percy because she sees so much of Arthur, whom she loves, in him. "Alright, let's see what you think about this one." Erin's eyes glow. "Now, there's the scene after Voldemort's return at the end of GoF. I think it more then a little suspicious that Bill is so eager to leave. Dumbledore was saying that a 'message' would be sufficient, presumably sent by owl post, yet Bill seemed to feel Arthur *had* to be informed... in... person?" Buoyed by her conviction in her theory, Erin had momentarily forgotten whom she was speaking to. Now she falls silent as Abigail flushes and her eyes begin to glow. "J'accuse!" She cries, knocking her teacup over in her excitement and spilling it all over herself and Erin. "J'accuse, ma petite fille! You Rocked the Boat! Not once, but twice now! You're stealing Imperius!Arthur canon in order to build your new ESE!Bill!" Erin cowers. "I didn't think anyone would notice! It's only a little canon, who's it hurting anyway?" she squeaks out, awash in spilled tea. "Plus, there just has to be more to it then Elkins' claim that Bill wants to spare his father the pain of finding out about Voldemort's returns through a letter. Look, only a few minutes later he cuts Dumbledore off mid-speech." "I've often wished I could do that myself." Abigail remarks. Erin frowns. Is it possible that Abigail is Ever So Evil? "Be that as it may." "Alright, so the two theories can coexist." Abigail concedes. "In fact, I think ESE!Bill is strengthened by making it dependent on Imperius!Arthur. Bill's father, a man he's supposed to admire, was felled by Voldemort, made to act against his own will. Maybe Bill figures a good way to prevent that sort of thing from happening to him is to ensure that he wants to do the things that his father was coerced into doing." "Plus," Erin continues excitedly. "This might be the solution to the mystery of Percy's behavior all through OOP. Just picture it: Bill runs straight to Percy and says 'Harry's gone mad and killed Cedric Diggory. And Dumbledore and Mum have fallen for every word of his crazy story. They actually believe Lord Voldemort has returned, and Dad and Mum are going to join this nutty Order thing of Dumbledore's'" "And then Bill goes and joins the nutty Order thing himself, and Percy doesn't find that odd?" Abigail raises an eyebrow. "Sorry, but Percy isn't that stupid. Even if he doesn't know about the Order's existence, he knows that Bill has suddenly relocated to England, and he can put two and two together." "That's where Bill tells Percy that he's moved back because he wants to keep trying to persuade his parents to see the truth." Abigail snorts. "But with or without Imperius!Arthur, you're going to have to explain to me why Bill felt it necessary to poison Percy's mind against Dumbledore in the first place. What great victory has he achieved for Voldemort's side?" Erin says "Oh, I don't know.... Just one more act of chaos in his evil little life? Probably to help discredit Arthur. So that the people at the ministry he's trying to persuade will look and say, "Wow, even his own *son* is against him. Maybe he's crazy after all." Abigail is examining Erin's BB GUN. She seems satisfied with the heft. "Hey, Erin?" she calls out finally. "Where did you say you got this idea anyway?" "Why, it was Errol and yourself who first put the idea in my head." Erin replies. "Remember last spring when you were both arguing over who would be the OOP death?" "Don't remind me." Abigail smiles. "We were both so far off base. I thought that Lupin was a goner, and Errol suggested Bill instead." "That's right." Erin nods. "He wondered why Bill was given so much screen time in GoF, and concluded that it had to be because he was going to die in OOP." Abigail grins. "I knew there was reason I liked this theory. Do you remember what my chief objection to Errol's suggestion was?" Before Erin can answer, Abigail procures a dusty scroll and reads. >>Killing off a Weasley brother moves the focus from Harry to Ron.<< "Errol disagreed with me at the time, but I think OOP bore me out." Abigail rolls up the dusty scroll. "Short of actually being in the room, Harry couldn't possibly have been more involved in the attack on Arthur. And yet he describes himself and Sirius as 'intruding on the family grief' when waiting for news of Arthur's condition. A wall comes up between the actual family members and the adopted son, and I believe this would be the case if Bill were to die. However, a betrayal to Voldemort would almost have to be a betrayal of Harry, directly or indirectly. Harry would be intimately affected, deeply hurt, and possibly imperiled by any betrayal of a Weasley family member. He wouldn't be at an emotional remove because at some level, it would all be about him. "Yeah," says Abigail happily, "I'm starting to like this idea. For one thing, if there has to be a spy or a betrayer - and I'm in no means convinced that there is - then the selection of adult figures who might fit the job is rather disappointing." Just as Abigail is about to elaborate, another voice pipes up. "She's right, you know. There's not a spy in the Order. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada." "Captain Jenny," Abigail nods amicably to the newcomer. "Captain Abigail," Jenny returns the nod happily. "Captain Jenny? Of SILK GOWNS (Suspiciously Insane Longbottoms, the Key is the Gum Or Wrappers that Neville Saves) fame?" asks Erin eagerly. "It's an honor to meet you, Captain." "And you must be Erin," Jenny said with a smile and a tinge of regret in her eyes for what she was about to say next. "Interesting theory, BB GUN, but no gun can fire without every piece working properly. Your canon is interesting, and the sneakoscope almost had me convinced, until I realized what didn't fit with ESE! Bill." As Erin eyed her warily, Jenny took a deep breath and plunged in with, "if Bill is evil, why didn't he tell Voldemort that only Voldemort or Harry could retrieve the prophecy? "Dumbledore told Harry that *we*, not *he*, had known all along what Voldemort didn't learn of until Rookwood informed him(1), meaning that the Order, not just Dumbledore, knew this." Jenny watched Erin curiously, waiting to see what she thought of this. But just as Erin opens her mouth to reply, Abigail jumps in, explaining that the "we" Dumbledore had spoken of didn't have to include ALL the order members. Erin is delighted. Abigail was defending the theory! She must really be taking a liking to it. Maybe it was time to offer her a BB GUN? But before Erin could even reach under her long trenchcoat... George came over, bearing a silver tray on which rested two elegant black-bordered engraved invitations: ~~ Breakfast at The Safe House~~ Erin picked hers up and examined it closely. "Er--" said George, "I wouldn't do that if -- oops!" In a few moments the two women had left a congealing plate of runny eggs and two little heaps of ash behind them and were standing before a garden path which led to the Safe House. It was clear what was expected of them. "Shall we?" asked Erin. Jenny nodded, and the two of them began to walk up the path. Back at the Royal George, a tall male figure with a long black cloak and long red hair uttered a gratuitous "Damn!" ---Erin TBAY posts referenced in this post: BB GUN parts 1 and 2: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85610 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85729 Imperius!Arthur: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/40168 Imperius!Arthur post-OOP: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/77654 SILK GOWNS: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/77145 From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 20:27:56 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:27:56 -0000 Subject: TBAY: Bill Weasley is Ever So Evil parts 1 & 2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85922 Erin and Captain Jenny were being ushered into the Safe House kitchen by Sneaky the the House-Elf. Erin was a bit nervous. She'd already stated that she thought her new ESE! Bill theory deserved a room in the Safe House, but she hadn't actually gotten around to mentioning it to any of the inhabitants of said house yet. "Say, this place is posh!" remarked Jenny, glancing around admiringly. Erin didn't answer. Seated at the table, sipping from a cup of red liquid, was a dark-haired woman wearing a cape and dark glasses. Pippin, stuff of legends and staunch defender of ESE!Lupin! Was this a trap? Could it really have been less than three hours ago that Erin had mentally declared herself an implacable enemy of this woman? Could Pippin read minds? Surely there was some way they could work things out! But Pippin showed no sign of wanting to rip out Erin's throat on the spot. "Good morning! and welcome," said she. "Just tell Sneaky here what you'd like." Erin tremblingly places her order and watches Jenny do the same, wondering why Sneaky giggles ever so slightly when Jenny's order turns out to be Eggs Benedict. Fear is clouding Erin's thought processes, but when she finally gets it, she nearly laughs aloud. Of course, Eggs Benedict *would* be a specialty of the Safe House. Seeming to feel that she has at reached an impartial witness, Jenny begins to repeat the objection to Erin's BB GUN theory which she had just voiced back at the Royal George. "If Bill is evil, why didn't he tell Voldemort that only Voldemort or Harry could retrieve the prophecy? "Dumbledore told Harry that *we*, not *he*, had known all along what Voldemort didn't learn of until Rookwood informed him, meaning that the Order, not just Dumbledore, knew this." As Jenny finishes, Pippin turns to look at Erin. Although she hides them behind the dark glasses, Erin can sense that her eyes are cold and empty and make you think of dark tunnels. With this chilling gaze upon her, Erin can't even begin to think about how Abigail had dealt with the Jenny's question, and has to stammer out that she is stumped. Now, she thought, now Pippin will eviscerate my theory. But to her very great surprise, Pippin smiles and commences to explain that the Rookwood scene had been staged! Erin is shocked. Why is Pippin helping her? Then she realizes; Jenny's question shed doubt upon not just BB GUN, but upon *all* ESE spy in the Order theories, including ESE! McGonagall and... ESE!Lupin. Pippin was not defending Erin's theory, she was defending her own! And, with that realization, the parting words of a small, dapper man with an elegantly waxed mustache return to her. "One must endeavor to keep an open mind, Madame. There are many hedgehogs in the forest." "You!" Erin says, pointing a finger at Pippin, "You sent Hercule Poirot to me in the forest!" Pippin smiles and nods, acknowledging the truth of this statement. "I admit that we share a... working relationship. But do you, Erin, remember what it was that he told you there? For if you had thought to use the information he gave you, you would not have needed the answers Abigail and I have provided this past hour. Erin's mouth drops open. "He- he said- -" she stammers weakly. "Yes?" Pippin prompts "He said that there already was canonical proof of a traitor in the Order. The Case of the Unfortunate Fate of Sturgis Podmore, he called it. Podmore, a member of the Order of the Phoenix, got busted trying to break through a high security door in the Ministry. And Voldemort was happy about it. By itself, that doesn't make sense. Why would Podmore try to break into the Department of Mysteries unless he was a Voldemort spy? But if he was a Voldemort spy, why would Voldemort be happy that he got caught and sentenced to Azkaban?" "He's not a Voldemort spy, because LV was happy that he got caught. LV was happy because Podmore worked for Dumbledore. But how did LV know that Podmore worked for DD? Not even the ministry could prove that. A spy from the Order must have told him." "Very good," says Pippin, but before she can continue, Oliver and Abigail walk into the room. A small owl sits on the shoulder of Abigail's many-pocketed overcoat. "There you are, Erin," says Abigail. "Right after you and Jenny disappeared, this owl turned up with a letter addressed to you. I figured this was where we'd find you. "And," says Oliver, clutching his BB GUN as he watches Pippin closely, "We wanted to make certain you were all right." The PARTY LINE badge on his otherwise unadorned black cloak chooses that moment to gleam brightly. "My first Theory Bay owl," says Erin happily. "Give it here, then". She detaches the letter from the owl's tiny foot and begins to read silently. As she reads, her faces starts to glow. "This letter is from Carolina/Silmariel, who writes that while she doesn't have time to journey all the way to Theory Bay, she's been enjoying hearing about my theory." reads Erin, blushing to the roots of her red hair. "But she wants to know why Charlie doesn't have a larger role in it. Charlie was a good Quidditch player who could have stayed in UK but basically he put hundreds of miles between him and his family. She thinks that maybe Charlie was starting to notice things about Bill that he didn't want to have to think about too deeply. And she says that if I'm going to give every other Weasley child a role in my theory, she wants to make sure Charlie has one as well." "You know, I think Carolina/Silmariel is on to something here. Because not only could Charlie have stayed and played Quidditch, but doesn't Ron tell Harry in the first book that there are wild dragons in England? So why *would* Charlie want to go off to Romania? This calls for Yet More Characterization!" There is a collective groan from her audience, and Erin sighs, "Okay, okay, I get the message. I'll save it for the third part of my theory, 'Possible Plotlines for ESE!Bill', which I expect to be done with by this weekend." She continues reading the letter silently for a few seconds, and then... "Oh, Oliver!" she bursts out. "We've been anagrammed! Listen to this: Carolina/Silmariel has found this inspiring anagram for us: Bill Weasley/ will slay bee." "Will slay bee!" Erin screams joyfully. "Do you realize what this means? Do you know who- " "Yes, yes, Erin, we all know that Dumbledore is the old English name for bumblebee," Abigail interrupts testily. "But I don't know if you should embrace this anagram so quickly. Have you considered the full implications of it?" Erin sobered suddenly. "It means Dumbledore really will have to die." she says sadly. "But, Abigail, this is a way that makes sense to me. I've been wondering for a while now if JKR even planned to kill Dumbledore off at all. There was this interview, see, where someone asked her, well here's the quote; ************************************************************* Q: Is Voldemort some sort of relative of Harry's? Possibly his mother's brother? A: I'm laughing...that would be a bit Star Wars, wouldn't it? http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/1000- scholastic-chat.htm ************************************************************** "Did you see that answer? 'A bit Star Wars!' You know what else would be a bit Star Wars, Abigail? If Harry's mentor, Dumbledore, were to go down in a duel with Voldemort. It would just be sloppy writing, really it would. But the good side's greatest warrior knifed in the back by a traitor from his own side? Well, that would definitely fit with the JKR's theme of death being senseless." "I have a question," says Oliver. " Would DD actually have to be -er- knifed in the back physically by Bill? Or AK'd, or whatever?" "No," Erin answers. "If Bill provides information that leads directly to DD's death at someone else's hands, I will consider him just as responsible, and the anagram just as true." "All right, then," says Oliver. "I'm still with you. Evil!Bill to the end." "Evil!Bill who kills Dumbledore, and-" Erin is amending, when suddenly a flash of bright green light slices over her shoulder, missing her by inches. Erin, Jenny and Abigail scream. A tall man in black with long red hair tied back behind him and an upraised wand stands before them. "You have irked me far too often this day. Spilling my secrets, trying pyschoanalyze me, and now revealing my Ever So Evil plan to off Dumbledore. You must be silenced! Avad- " "Quickly! Into the control room! It can only be accessed by Portkey!" yells Pippin. The five of them race through the halls until they reach the control room, where Sneaky the House-Elf is already cowering. "We wizard-proofed this place a long time ago," explains Pippin, gesturing at all the rows of buttons, levers, and videoscreens. "There's no telling how much harm Stoned!Harry could do if he were able to enter. Now, you two," she says, turning to Erin and Oliver, "you do realize what you've done?" "It's Ever So Evil Bill," whispers Oliver miserably. "Our belief has embodied him. Oh Erin, what are we going to do?" ----Erin Main posts referenced in this post: ESE!Bill parts 1 and 2: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85610 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85729 ESE!Lupin: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39362 From tem4w5 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 19:59:49 2003 From: tem4w5 at yahoo.com (tem4w5) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 19:59:49 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Ron In-Reply-To: <012601c3b452$57be8ed0$6401a8c0@helenw1> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85923 My very first post! Hooray! Marci: > I like your crackpot theory of the Albus/Ron parallel. They are both > tall redheads. Okay, Albus hair is silver, but it was auburn once. Helen: > I am with you guys too... if you listen to the audio... those kids > sprung that on her. She didn't quite tell a lie.... ;) > > Dumbledore is the teacher. Ron becomes a professor, yet doesn't ;) I like the crackpot theory, too; it's charming and fun to think about, the Bertie Bott evidence is interesting, and I could even accept explaining away the JKR quote. However, alas, I don't think I can jump on board. I'm thinking of this from OotP: "'I doubt it,' shouted tiny Professor Marchbanks, 'not if Dumbledore doesn't want to be found! I should know examined him personally in Transfiguration and Charms when he did NEWTs did things with a wand I'd never seen before.'" And then I start wondering how time travelling Ron shows up at the Hogwarts of the past and presents himself for NEWTs even though he's never been a student there. Then on top of that the formerly average student Ron shows genius abilities that amaze the tester. I don't think Ron's stupid or untalented, but he would have a lot of catching up to do in the next two years to make that plausible, I'm afraid. Sigh. I was all excited about it for about 10 minutes there. Maybe I should get a BB GUN instead. ~Teresa From mt3t3l1 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 20:44:36 2003 From: mt3t3l1 at yahoo.com (mt3t3l1) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:44:36 -0000 Subject: It may be M.A.D. but it's mine In-Reply-To: <20031126030959.51931.qmail@web25106.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85924 > Introducing my M.A.D. theory. Miss Arabella Dumbledore. > > > > It would make sense if she were Dumbledore's little sister. Consider their names. We have Albus, Aberforth, and now Arabella. Now, before you start posting about how weak that is, remember the Lucius/Lupin connection Pippin came up with, and the missing "D" child of the Weasley's. * And * Harry says she's a "mad old lady." :o) (ss/ps pg 22 scholastic). > > > > So there you have it, do with it what you will, but be gentle, this is my first theory. > May I offer as an alternate theory, Arabella McGonagall? In SS Chapter 14 and PoA Chapter 13, McGonagall appears in a tartan bathrobe/dressing gown. In OoP Chapter 1, Mrs. Figg appears in tartan carpet slippers. Minerva was the Roman goddess of war. There are many possible meanings for "ara" and "bella" but two are "altar" and "war." Just thought I'd throw that out there. 3T3 From helen at odegard.com Wed Nov 26 20:55:35 2003 From: helen at odegard.com (Helen R. Granberry) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 12:55:35 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Headmaster Ron In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <017a01c3b45f$a467e170$6401a8c0@helenw1> No: HPFGUIDX 85925 I like the crackpot theory, too; it's charming and fun to think about, the Bertie Bott evidence is interesting, and I could even accept explaining away the JKR quote. However, alas, I don't think I can jump on board. I'm thinking of this from OotP: "'I doubt it,' shouted tiny Professor Marchbanks, 'not if Dumbledore doesn't want to be found! I should know. examined him personally in Transfiguration and Charms when he did NEWTs. did things with a wand I'd never seen before.'" And then I start wondering how time travelling Ron shows up at the Hogwarts of the past and presents himself for NEWTs even though he's never been a student there. Then on top of that the formerly average student Ron shows genius abilities that amaze the tester. I don't think Ron's stupid or untalented, but he would have a lot of catching up to do in the next two years to make that plausible, I'm afraid. Sigh. I was all excited about it for about 10 minutes there. Maybe I should get a BB GUN instead. ~Teresa Ah! But what if Dumbledore coaches Ron a bit beforehand? Ron still has two years left. He has already shown a move towards responsibility. He's a bright kid... AND, he's working with the DA. Remember, these kids are doing NEWT level DADA as fifth years. Plus... the NEWT is a qualifying exam. Is it possible he could take it years later after arriving in the past? There is more... which a friend and I are working on. I don't see the NEWT as a problem -- more like a Red Herring. From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 21:17:05 2003 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 21:17:05 -0000 Subject: It may be M.A.D. but it's mine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85926 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mt3t3l1" wrote: > > > Introducing my M.A.D. theory. Miss Arabella Dumbledore. > > > > > > > > It would make sense if she were Dumbledore's little sister. > Consider their names. We have Albus, Aberforth, and now Arabella. > Now, before you start posting about how weak that is, remember the > Lucius/Lupin connection Pippin came up with, and the missing "D" > child of the Weasley's. * And * Harry says she's a "mad old > lady." :o) (ss/ps pg 22 scholastic). > > > > > > > > So there you have it, do with it what you will, but be gentle, this > is my first theory. > > > > May I offer as an alternate theory, Arabella McGonagall? > > In SS Chapter 14 and PoA Chapter 13, McGonagall appears in a tartan > bathrobe/dressing gown. In OoP Chapter 1, Mrs. Figg appears in tartan > carpet slippers. > > Minerva was the Roman goddess of war. There are many possible > meanings for "ara" and "bella" but two are "altar" and "war." > > Just thought I'd throw that out there. > > 3T3 LOL. That's my MAMAS theory. LOL Mrs. Figg and McGonagall Are Sisters. Marci (Though I like the idea of her being a Dumbledore.) From steve at hp-lexicon.org Wed Nov 26 21:29:18 2003 From: steve at hp-lexicon.org (hp_lexicon) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 21:29:18 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85927 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" wrote: > Check out new info added to timeline and see if you agree. Input > appreciated. > > Marci (down with Lexicon) LOL > > > As for the timeline, it has been broadened a bit and is on the web > > and up for review. I hope you all can take a look and give some > > input. I'd appreciate it. > > > > See it here: > http://www.geocities.com/adulthpfanatics/HPtimeline.html > > > > The website is still up at > > www.geocities.com/blackgold101/HPfiles.html but will be moving to > > www.geocities.com/adulthpfanatics > > as soon as I get off my lazy but and move it. > > > > Marci Hi, all: Excellent thread! I'm a little surprised by the "down with Lexicon" bit, though. The timelines on the Lexicon originated right here, on this list. Right after GF came out, all us folks on HPfGU spent a huge amount of time having discussions which sounded a lot like the ones in this thread. We debated the seven years since the Quidditch cup, the last appearence of Bill at Hogwarts, and all those other details and quotes. We ended up deciding that there were some things we just weren't sure of, like Bill's age. From all the information we did compile and analyze, I wrote up the timeline on the Lexicon. I still have the posts saved in a file, as a matter of fact, including a detailed analysis of the Weasley kids' birth years etc. which someone did for me...Rita, maybe... Since then, we've learned a LOT of new information, from the Famous Wizard cards to the school books to the information from an entirely new book. I think it's a great idea to fire up the discussion again and fine-tune what we know. Material has been tacked onto the Lexicon timelines over the years and it't high time we revisit everything. Along those lines, I am working with Warner Bros. to get more detailed information about Rowling's input into the "official" timeline on the DVD. Troels has written a brilliant analysis of the years in which the books may have happened, and I would be very interested in hearing his take on the timeline question. You are all doing an excellent job of synthesizing what we know and what we can logically surmise, which is very helpful. So I'm going to be following this thread eagerly. I'll be adding posts to my timeline folder. At some point, maybe during Christmas break, I'll start the whole thing over from scratch and try to integrate as much of the new thinking as possible. Please feel free to throw an email my way if you have a point you'd particularly like to make. Many thanks, Steve The Lexicon From zanelupin at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 22:27:10 2003 From: zanelupin at yahoo.com (KathyK) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 22:27:10 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: <004d01c3b49d$255c3190$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85928 K wrote: >On a related note Ginny makes a comment about wanting to go to Hogwarts since Bill got his letter - is that even possible? Would she have been born when Bill was 11?< KathyK: Ginny says (CoS, US 323): "I've looked forward to coming to Hogwarts ever since B-Bill came" Just a minor point, but she doesn't actually say she's wanted to go since Bill got his letter. I don't think she was referring specifically to the time Bill began at Hogwarts but more generally to the time Bill was there. I may be off but that's how I interpreted her statement. KathyK From t.forch at mail.dk Wed Nov 26 22:43:13 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 23:43:13 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031126234106.050bf5a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 85929 At 19:18 26-11-03 +0000, Marci wrote: >I just finished reading PS again. I came across Slytherin winning >the House cup six years in a row. No mention of them not winning >since Charlie left. Only mentioning is that Harry is a 'better' >seeker. I think he says something along those lines in POA though. > >See why I needed input? LOL Regarding the relative age of the two older Weasley brothers, I have compiled the following based on earlier posts of mine to alt.fan.harry-potter. I hope it'll help you just a little (it does offer an upper limit on Bill's age, though ;-) We know that there was seven years during which Gryffindor didn't win the Quidditch cup until they won it in Harry's third year, /and/ that the last time they won it it was with Charlie Weasley. That much is evident from PoA-12 'The Patronus': " 'Seriously,' said Professor McGonagall, and she was actually smiling. 'I daresay you'll need to get the feel of it before Saturday's match, won't you? And Potter - /do/ try and win, won't you? Or we'll be out of the running for the eighth year in a row, as Professor Snape was kind enough to remind me only last night ...' " (p. 184, Bloomsbury) and PoA-15 'The Quidditch Final': " The whole of Gryffindor House was obsessed with the coming match. Gryffindor hadn't won the Quidditch Cup since the legendary Charlie Weasley (Ron's second-oldest brother) had been Seeker. But Harry doubted whether any of them, even Wood, wanted to win as much as he did. The enmity ... " (p. 221f, Bloomsbury) I usually prefer this set of evidence which ties clearly to the Quidditch Cup (it is not clear in PS whether it's only the House Cup or both the House Cup and the Quidditch Cup that Slytherin has won for six years in a row), however, if we discount Harry's second year (where the Quidditch tournament was cancelled) the two numbers fit. We cannot be sure that Charlie Weasley won the cup in his seventh year - he may have stopped playing or he may have lost the Quidditch Cup the last year or years while he was at Hogwarts. Still - I will claim that it would be unreasonable to postulate that he was younger than in his fourth year when Gryffindor last won the Cup (before PoA that is), and he was probably older (seeing as he became the "legendary Charlie Weasley"), though not older than his seventh year. All this adds up to Charlie being somewhere between nine and twelve years ahead of Ron and Harry, which means that he is between 20 and 24 at the time when Harry and Ron starts school. There's a passage from PS-9 'The Midnight Duel': " 'I tell you, we're going to win that Quidditch Cup for sure this year,' said Fred. 'We haven't won since Charlie left, but this year's team is going to be brilliant. You must be good, Harry, Wood was almost skipping when he told us.' " (p. 114, Bloomsbury) This might be seen as meaning that Gryffindor indeed did win just before Charlie left (i.e. in his seventh year) and while that does seem the most reasonable interpretation, it is, unfortunately, not the only. If, however, we accept this interpretation, then we can deduce that Charlie is twelve years older than Harry and Ron. Let me summarise this graphically: "Charlie's years" are his Hogwarts years, which are extended beyond the seven to provide a reference. "Harry's years" are also Hogwarts years, and "Gryf. not winning" are counting the years in which Gryffindor didn't win the Quidditch Cup. At the right is the scenario in which Gryffindor won the cup when Charlie was in his seventh year (the most likely) and at the left is the, IMO quite unlikely, scenario in which Gryffindor and Charlie's last victory was in Charlie's fourth year. Harry's Gryf. not Charlie's Gryf. not Harry's years winning years winning years 1 2 3 4 1 . . . . . 5 2 . . . . . 6 3 . . . . . 7 4 . . . . . 8 . . . . . 1 5 . . . . . 9 . . . . . 2 1 . . . . . 6 . . . . 10 . . . . . 3 2 . . . . . 7 . . . . 11 . . . . . 4 3 . . . . . 8 . . . . 12 . . . . . 5 4 . . . . . . . . . . 13 . . . . . 6 . . . . . 1 5 . . . . . . . . . . 14 . . . . . 7 . . . . . 2 6 . . . . . . . . . . 15 . . . . . 8 . . . . . 3 This makes Charlie presumably 9 to 12 years older than Harry. It is possible for him to be down to 7 years older if we completely discard our sense of the reasonable and focus on what's possible given the texts ;-) On to Bill. In CoS Ginny tells Harry that "'I've looked forward to coming to Hogwarts ever since B-Bill came" which tells us that Bill must have been at Hogwarts while Ginny can remember. Ginny is one year younger than Harry and Ron therefore 10 to 13 years younger than Charlie. If we claim that Ginny could, at the earliest have remembered Bill going to Hogwarts when she was 1, then we can start computing an upper limit for his age. If she remembered him going to Hogwarts in his last year when she was one, then he would be about 16 years older than her and 15 years older than Harry and Ron. The youngest he can be is about 9 months older than Charlie, which might even put them in the same year. Charlie's age must therefore be the lower bound for Bill's age as well. If we go by what seems the most realistic interpretation of Charlie's Quidditch victories - i.e. that he and his team won while he was in his seventh year, then we get a Charlie Weasley who is twelve years older than Ron and Harry, and if we furthermore require that Ginny was three years old when she remembers Bill coming to Hogwarts, then he would be about thirteen years older than Harry and Ron (14 years older than Ginny). There are obviously some uncertainties involved in this - if Ginny's memory is of Bill coming home with his NEWTs he might be a year older, there's the statement from PS-7 'The Sorting Hat' that "Slytherin have got the cup six years in a row!" (Nearly Headless Nick says that, but he's a ghost - who knows how good his sense of time is ;-) though that might refer to the House Cup alone and not to the Quidditch cup as well. Troels From erinellii at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 23:18:31 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 23:18:31 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031126234106.050bf5a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85930 Troels wrote: > If we go by what seems the most realistic interpretation of Charlie's > Quidditch victories - i.e. that he and his team won while he was in his > seventh year, then we get a Charlie Weasley who is twelve years older than > Ron and Harry, and if we furthermore require that Ginny was three years > old when she remembers Bill coming to Hogwarts, then he would be about > thirteen years older than Harry and Ron (14 years older than Ginny). Erin: Dang, Troels, you are good. I could never have drawn up that chart like you did. The paragraph above is the only one I have the problem with. Why is it most reasonable to assume that Charlie won the cup his seventh year? In PS, Wood compares Harry's and Charlie's flying styles. How would he be able to do that if he had never seen Charlie fly? I think it more reasonable to assume Charlie last won in his sixth year. That way, Wood could have seen him in his first year and Charlie's seventh year, and yet Wood would never have seen Gryffindor win a Quidditch cup. Erin From tcyhunt at earthlink.net Wed Nov 26 23:47:14 2003 From: tcyhunt at earthlink.net (Tracy Hunt) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 23:47:14 -0000 Subject: It may be M.A.D. but it's mine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85931 Allie asked: > Can someone refresh my memory or point me to the posts? I joined this > group a little late in the game (after OoP, gasp!), and I'm not sure what the > Lucius/Lupin/missing D child is about. Tcy replies: Allie, the Fantastic Posts is a great place to catch up on great posts and some pretty amazing theories. For references to your specific questions on the missing Weasley child, check out this link (the specific question to look for here addresses reasons for the gap in ages of the current Weasley children--you can check out footnote 15 at the bottom for specific posts on it): http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/weasley.html I'm not exactly sure about the Lucius/Lupin thing. I can only think of one message with those two tied to each other - and it was only a side note from Pippin (message # 85402)...but check it out...it may be what you're looking for. Tcy (glad to have provided answers rather than questions for once) From Zarleycat at aol.com Wed Nov 26 23:53:35 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 23:53:35 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS - Chapter 6 - The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85932 "Claire" < > Questions are at the end because they are in the order that they > occurred to me. I know there are far more than I could come up with > and I've tried (no doubt unsucessfully) to not duplicate what's > already been discussed with this chapter. However, since the > information contained in it is fairly significant, repetition is not > necessarily a bad thing. Happy discussing and Happy Thanksgiving to > all my U.S. compatriots. > > Claire > 1) What kind of reaction would someone have to Doxy poison that > makes obtaining one so attractive to Fred and George for their > Skivving Snackbox experiments? Something unpleasant, but hopefully not lethal. Speaking of Fred and George, the idea of these Snackboxes revolted me. Plus, later on in the book when they are busy getting other students to act as testers - that really bothered me for some reason. I can't really figure out why - this is the wizard world where broken bones repair overnight and all sorts of hexes make unpleasant things happen that can be quickly cleared up. But, these tests really bothered me. > 2) Why did Voldemort order Regulus Black's murder? Was is just > because he decided to leave the Death Eaters (the date of his death > seems to be around the time of Harry`s birth)? What was he being > asked to do that panicked him enough to try to get out? I think just to make an example of him to his other devoted followers, as in "Step out of line and you're history." As for what he was asked to do? Who knows? Maybe he was supposed to kill a bunch of mixed blood children and discovered he really didn't have the stomach for that. Maybe he was supposed to betray his brother, and found out that blood is thicker than water... > 3) What made Andromeda Tonks go against the pure-blood ethics of > her family when her sisters were so obviously devoted to it? Well, why couldn't there be two people in the Black family (or possibly three if we throw in Uncle Alphard) who didn't buy into the pure blood bit? Or maybe that Ted Tonks really had a lot going for him ;-) > 4) Where does the Black family's pure-blood arrogance have its > roots? Does "Nature's Nobility: A Wizarding Genealogy" hold the key? In the mists of time. It's that old 'We've been here forever, and we have a lot of money, so of course we're better than you." I'd like to know what the Blacks of Sirius' parents' generation did for a living. Or did they all simply sit on their piles of gold sneering at everyone else? > 5) What made Sirius come to hate his family's obsession with pure > blood? More information needed. Was he a pure-blood little prince until he got to Hogwarts? Did his parents cultivate their son's friendship with James Potter in the years before Hogwarts because of whatever position or wealth the Potter family had, only to regret it later? > 6) Could the crystal phial with the opal stopper hopper hold blood, > as Harry assumes? If so, could it literally be "pure blood"? Hadn't thought about it, but that house was creepy enough to make anything possible. And, if it is blood, whose is it? > 9) Why is Ginny the only one impervious to the music box's > weakening effects and is able to shut it? Maybe she's tone-deaf. > 10) Why did Sirius's father put "every security measure known to > wizardkind" on the house? If he was more than just a casual dabbler in the Dark Arts, he may have wanted to make his house as secure as possible against intrusion by anyone, including those nosy Ministry officials. > 11) If pure bloods are so limited that they have to intermarry, and > Molly and Arthur are related to the Blacks, shouldn't some Weasley > ancestor be on the family tree? Surely they couldn't all be "blood > traitors". I think the tapestry leaves us with a lot of questions. If one assumes that Slytherin is made up of mostly pure-bloods, then shouldn't Snape's name have also been on the tapestry? You'd think that name would have caught Harry's eye, as would the names Weasley or Potter...Either we'll discover at a later time that these names really are here and Harry just didn't notice, or this is one of the many details we obsess over that is of no importance to JKR. Marianne From t.forch at mail.dk Thu Nov 27 00:22:04 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 01:22:04 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: References: <4.3.2.7.2.20031126234106.050bf5a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031127010017.050c36a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 85933 At 23:18 26-11-03 +0000, you wrote: >Troels wrote: > > If we go by what seems the most realistic interpretation of > > Charlie's Quidditch victories - i.e. that he and his team > > won while he was in his seventh year, then we get a Charlie > > Weasley who is twelve years older than Ron and Harry, and if > > we furthermore require that Ginny was three years old when > > she remembers Bill coming to Hogwarts, then he would be > > about thirteen years older than Harry and Ron (14 years older > > than Ginny). > > >Erin: >In PS, Wood compares Harry's and Charlie's flying styles. How would >he be able to do that if he had never seen Charlie fly? I think it >more reasonable to assume Charlie last won in his sixth year. That >way, Wood could have seen him in his first year and Charlie's seventh >year, and yet Wood would never have seen Gryffindor win a Quidditch >cup. I overlooked that - thanks. You are of course right - that changes the assessment of the most reasonable year for his last Quidditch Cup victory. Incorporating the requirement that Wood's first year must be the same as Charlie's seventh into the table we get: Charlie's Gryf. not Wood's Harry's years winning Years years 1 2 3 4 5 6 . . . . . 1 7 . . . . . 2 . . . . . 1 8 . . . . . 3 . . . . . 2 9 . . . . . 4 . . . . . 3 10 . . . . . 5 . . . . . 4 11 . . . . . 6 . . . . . 5 . . . . . 1 12 . . . . . 7 . . . . . 6 . . . . . 2 13 . . . . . 8 . . . . . 7 . . . . . 3 Which makes Charlie ten years older than Harry. That means that Charlie won the Quidditch cup for the last time while he was in his fifth year - a little younger than I originally thought reasonable (especially in light of his legendary status), but he could have been instrumental in their winning it four times in a row at that point, and he would of course still be a fabulous seeker even if the rest of the side wasn't up to his standard. I think it's possible that Ginny's "since Bill came ..." might refer to the point when he came home after taking his NEWTs - IIRC he got a fair number and that might have provoked a party in the Burrow that young Ginny might remember. I don't think it's reasonable to assume that she'd remember anything from before she was two, so let's stick to Bill being a maximum of sixteen years older than Ginny. That puts Bill down as being eleven to fifteen years older than Harry and Ron (discarding the possibility of Bill and Charlie being in the same year). That's not too bad - narrowing it down to about four years is better than I had hoped for ;-) Thanks again ;-) Troels From t.forch at mail.dk Thu Nov 27 00:27:23 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 01:27:23 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031127010017.050c36a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20031126234106.050bf5a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031127012509.050c6ee0@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 85934 At 01:22 27-11-03 +0100, Troels Forchhammer wrote: >At 23:18 26-11-03 +0000, Erin wrote: > >Troels wrote: > > > If we go by what seems the most realistic interpretation of > > > Charlie's Quidditch victories - i.e. that he and his team > > > won while he was in his seventh year, then we get a Charlie > > > Weasley who is twelve years older than Ron and Harry, and if > > > we furthermore require that Ginny was three years old when > > > she remembers Bill coming to Hogwarts, then he would be > > > about thirteen years older than Harry and Ron (14 years older > > > than Ginny). > > > >Erin: > >In PS, Wood compares Harry's and Charlie's flying styles. How would > >he be able to do that if he had never seen Charlie fly? I think it > >more reasonable to assume Charlie last won in his sixth year. That > >way, Wood could have seen him in his first year and Charlie's seventh > >year, and yet Wood would never have seen Gryffindor win a Quidditch > >cup. > >I overlooked that - thanks. As far as I can find it was McGonagall who compared Harry to Charlie, 'He caught that thing in his hand after a fifty-foot dive,' Professor McGonagall told Wood. 'Didn't even scratch himself. Charlie Weasley couldn't have done it.' Unless it was another passage that I didn't find, that you thought of? From erinellii at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 00:53:54 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 00:53:54 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031127012509.050c6ee0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85935 Troels Forchhammer: > As far as I can find it was McGonagall who compared Harry to > Charlie, > > 'He caught that thing in his hand after a fifty-foot dive,' > Professor McGonagall told Wood. 'Didn't even scratch himself. Charlie > Weasley couldn't have done it.' > > Unless it was another passage that I didn't find, that you thought > of? Erin: It was this one: "That Quidditch cup'll have our name on it this year," said Wood happily as they trudged back up to the castle. "I wouldn't be surprised if you turn out to be better than Charlie Weasley, and he could have played for England if he hadn't gone off chasing dragons." PS/SS Ch.10, p.170 hardback American edition Erin From erinellii at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 01:10:06 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 01:10:06 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85936 > Now Hermowninny writes: > Perhaps this *tiny* quote can be used in the BB GUN theory currently floating around. What if he graduated in 1984, then had some ever so evil reason to return to Hogwarts in the spring of 1990? Hmmm, what else happened in 1990--Fudge became MoM, Quirrel took a year off (maybe), what else... Hey, maybe Bill filled in for Quirrel when he > was gone--but, then again, maybe it was for some much more evil > reason! Erin, Oliver, where are you? > > -Hermowninny Erin: Here I am! Don't know how much I can do, though. Until we got onto this whole timeline thing, I had always assumed that was when Charlie had graduated and Bill was there to watch him. Now that I realize that can't be the case, the question is up for grabs... Possibly they had him out to take a look at the DADA jinx, see if he could break it? But he must have failed miserably if that was true... If it was an ESE reason, it would have to have been something he was planning rather than actually doing, because according to BB GUN he doesn't officially becom a DE until LV's return in GoF. Of course, he *had* been planning to join all along.... The most likely reason I can actually think of would be that that was the year Fred and George joined the Quidditch team as little 12-year- olds. Bill probably got some time off work to come and watch their first game. Awwww, how sweet. Possibly he used the excuse to scout out DD's defenses? Erin From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Thu Nov 27 01:15:11 2003 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:15:11 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Snape's Fury (was: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ul Message-ID: <2BA72D07.3A54531C.4B073798@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85937 Suzanne said: >I do expect much more from Snape. In fact, I predict that >Snape will sacrifice himself in order to save Harry so that >Harry can fulfill the prophecy and kill Voldemort. No! That would be *terrible* (for me at least)! I don't want to spend 6-ish books learning about how bitter Snape is, and how he can't stand MWPP even after half are dead, and then to have him turn into a martyr! Snape is a Slytherin, and Slytherins are brave but not dumb. I don't want Snape to turn into a golden hero. The only way his sacrifice would be all right for me is if it were to go down something like this: The Trio is working to fight Voldemort (against all the wishes of everyone in the Order as they are so prone to doing). They get captured or lured into a trap (as they are easy to trick *coughMOMcough*). Snape goes to help. Of course, Harry won't let anyone sacrifice themselves, so Snape has to curse them to get them out of the way. Then, Snape can die. . I just want Snape to go out the way he's been in: a big gigantic git. That's the way I love him. Oryomai -On an OT note, if anyone knows the show Kiss Me, Kate , and knows a good audition song, could you e-mail me *off-list* please? Don't want the List Elves to be angry with me... :-) From artcase at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 02:04:27 2003 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 02:04:27 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85938 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Martha" wrote: snip, snip, the scissors go again... > ...I'm inclined to think that defeat will come through > something unexpected, and is more likely to involve one of those > things worse than death that Dumbledore refers to than death itself, > and that this is likely to be a thing-worse-than-death that's > personal to Voldemort. What this is likely to be I have no idea, but > I don't think it's having your entrails Accio'd (not matter how cool > the phrase "Accio entrails!" is.) :-) Art: ROTFLMHO..accio entrails....But seriously, the real reason I wanted to reply was because this next part... Martha wrote: ... I don't think he'll learn to be a nasty, mean person so he can effectively throw AK or the Cruciatus curse. I think when it comes down to it he'll win because he's good and he's not evil. What would be the point if Harry won, but in doing so had more or less become Voldemort? To go off on a tangent, one of the moments in OoP that really grabbed me was when Harry is kicking off in Dumbledore's office, and he shouts, "I don't want to be human!" (no books handy, apologies). At the end of the day, Tom Riddle chose not to be human, and I'm hoping Harry will choose to carry on being human. Art: This is precisely why the series is important and potentially effective. The real question is: How does a moral person commit an immoral act(murder)? Soldiers deal with this question. Victims of crimes who fight back deal with this question. There are (according to Plato) violent and involuntary homicides. Involuntary homicides can be defined as accidental death. On the other side of the coin there are the violent homicides. According to Western law homicide is not murder when it is in defence of one's own body or in defense of another person in response to an initiation of force. In other words, Harry cannot morally go looking for a fight. He must "kill" Voldemort during a battle that Voldemort initiates. Another quick note: Harry, in response to the prophecy, regards the killing of Voldemort as "murder." There is no grey to his view. That is a point that I believe lies at the heart of this adventure, the "greying" of the rules that come with growing up. OR Harry is already "premeditating" his murder of Voldemort. In that case, maybe he shouldn't live past the end of the series.... Art. From bibphile at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 02:36:37 2003 From: bibphile at yahoo.com (bibphile) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 02:36:37 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85939 me (bibphile): I don't think so, Marci. Charlie is younger than Bill. If Bill had graduated 5 years ago, Charlie would have had to graduate the year before Harry started. In PS Fred said they hadn't won the Quidditch cup since Charlie left. Id Charlie had just left he's badically be saying "We haven't won the Quidditch cup since last year." That makes no sense becuase that was the last opportunity to win the Quidditch cup. Marci: > > I just finished reading PS again. I came across Slytherin winning > the House cup six years in a row. No mention of them not winning > since Charlie left. Only mentioning is that Harry is a 'better' > seeker. I think he says something along those lines in POA though. > That's the House Cup. I was talking about the Quidditch cup. It is a completely seperate thing. In PS they hadn't won the House Cup for 6 years. In POA they had lost the Quidditch Cup 7 years in a row. In PS Fred said they hadn't won the Quidditch Cup since Charlie left. By that comment I think they probably won Charlie's 7th year and certainly their last win was no later than his 5th. So Charlie is 10-12 years older than Harry and Ron. I go with 12. Of course, that goes against Ginny's comment that she's wanted to go to Hogwarts since Bill went. That doesn't make much sense if he was 14+ (or even 12+) when she was born. So I assume she meant one of the times he went to Hogwarts, not the first. We've been arguing about this for years. I doubt we'll really know until JKR tell us. bibphile From hermowninny719 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 03:08:37 2003 From: hermowninny719 at yahoo.com (hermowninny719) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 03:08:37 -0000 Subject: Ravenclaw Mascot-Challenging Lexicon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85940 Arya wrote: I searched the archives and unbelievable cannot find anything on this. I see on the Lexicon that Ravenclaw's house mascot is listed as the Eagle and not a Raven. I am searching for canon to confirm the true mascot of the House. Does anyone have any references they can point me towards that I am missing and not recalling? Now me: (SS Amer Ed. Pg 34) "Harry saw a purple wax seal bearing a coat of arms; a lion, an eagle, a badger, and a snake surrounding a large letter H." (GoF Amer Ed. Pg 237) "Enormous silk banners bung from the walls, each of them representing a Hogwarts House; red with a gold lion for Gryffindor, blue with a bronze eagle for Ravenclaw, yellow with a black badger for Hufflepuff, and green with a silver serpent for Slytherin. Behind the teachers' table, the largest banner of all bore the Hogwarts coat of arms; lion, eagle, badger, and snake united around a large letter H." I've seen several responses to this post, but found two additional quotes, so I thought I'd chime in. -Hermowninny From mpjdekker at hotmail.com Thu Nov 27 03:37:46 2003 From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 03:37:46 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Ron In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85941 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tem4w5" wrote: > > However, alas, I don't think I can jump on board. > > I'm thinking of this from OotP: > > "'I doubt it,' shouted tiny Professor Marchbanks, 'not if > Dumbledore doesn't want to be found! I should know examined him > personally in Transfiguration and Charms when he did NEWTs did > things with a wand I'd never seen before.'" > > And then I start wondering how time travelling Ron shows up at the > Hogwarts of the past and presents himself for NEWTs even though > he's never been a student there. Then on top of that the formerly > average student Ron shows genius abilities that amaze the tester. I > don't think Ron's stupid or untalented, but he would have a lot of > catching up to do in the next two years to make that plausible, I'm > afraid. > > Sigh. I was all excited about it for about 10 minutes there. Maybe I > should get a BB GUN instead. > > ~Teresa Of course, the fact that Dumbledore did things with a wand the examiner never had seen before could also be seen as more evidence in favor of the Dumbledore is Ron theory. The examiner had never before seen the things Dumbledore!Ron did with his wand because Dumbledore! Ron had been educated 150 years in the future. I'm sure there have been countless advances in magic over the past 150 years; Ron just inadvertently performed spells which at that time still hadn't been discovered. As for why Ron would show up for NEWT exams 150 years ago: Ron might have travelled back in time right before his present-day NEWTs, not have realised this, and just have shown up for exams. For some reason plot intrigues always seem to happen right around exam time. (it's best not to ask why this is) Ron may also simply have decided that being stuck in the past with a qualification would be better than being stuck in the past without it. -Maus From oneel at yahoo.com Wed Nov 26 20:49:06 2003 From: oneel at yahoo.com (Tania Canedo) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 20:49:06 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Ron In-Reply-To: <010201c3b443$f517c4d0$6401a8c0@helenw1> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85942 That's nice... but... Let us remember if DD IS Ron, then, why at the beggining he ALSO belived Sirius was the one that betrayed the Potters, and, as PoA goes on, he changes his mind. He could have easily said that PP was the real secret keeper of the Potters, didn't he? In other hand... this is a supporting fact... If DD IS Ron, then that explains why he insisted James that HE should be their secret keeper, because he knew that PP would be the secret keeper and would betray the Potters... ........Im getting dizzy...... this time travel stuff instead of getting clearer every post gets stranger...!!! I forgot something!! 2 things... if Ron is DD, then he would have been recognized by the OWL examiners, wouldn't he? If some of them knew DD as a young man... and....... "That's Dumbledore's brother, Aberforth..." pg 174 OotP (EV)... so, it means DD's got a brother, how could he have a brother if he's Ron? Brothers don't just appear... Tania From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 26 21:59:28 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 21:59:28 -0000 Subject: Chess Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85943 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "iris_ft" wrote: Angel of the north: > > The DEs being white is a curious thing, as white initially suggests > > purity, sterility even. But consider - the likes of Lucius seem to > exist > > quite openly, in the light. (skip) > > Iris: > You give yourself the explanation: white suggests purity and > sterility. Now who are the Death Eaters? They are purebloods, > obsessed with their pure lineage. Just the kind of behaviour that > leads to sterility (not only biological, but also cultural, > psychological, etc). And you add in your post that the White pieces > always play first. It's what happens in GoF: the Death Eaters play > first, and so does Evil. At the end of the book, we realize that the > whole action has been manipulated by Voldemort. He always > anticipated his action, he always played first. Geoff: It is also interesting that, in a number of literary and other cases, the people or beings who are most evil have started out as being of the light - which tends to be associated with white. Black and dark are usually linked with evil and light and white with good. Tom Riddle's hatred of his background and treatment turned him to the Dark Arts and he became unrecognisable as the "clever, handsome boy who was once Head Boy here". (COS p. 242 UK edition). This equates with Christian tradition and the parallel which Tolkien (sorry Kneasy) used in LOTR and the Silmarillion. In Christian tradition, Satan (the deceiver) was once the mightiest of the angels - Lucifer (bringer of light) and fell from heaven because he turned towards evil and the dark. Likewise Tolkien's Melkor (he who arises in might), the first and greatest of the Ainur, fell because he wished to emulate and best Eru (the one) and became the evil, dark Morgoth (The Black Enemy). Iris: > (Big big skip), because I don't have the time to comment what you > write about the pieces. I 'd just want to know something. You call > Hermione "the Rook", but JKr calls her "the Castle" in PS/SS > (Bloomsbury paperback). Which word do chess players use more oftenly? Geoff: The pieces are most frequently referred to as rooks and in the style of annotation which records a move as, say, KR-R4. Castle tends to be reserved for the move of castling. Geoff From gbannister10 at aol.com Wed Nov 26 22:08:43 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 22:08:43 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Ron In-Reply-To: <017a01c3b45f$a467e170$6401a8c0@helenw1> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85944 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Helen R. Granberry" wrote: > Helen: > Ah! But what if Dumbledore coaches Ron a bit beforehand? Ron still has > two years left. He has already shown a move towards responsibility. He's > a bright kid... AND, he's working with the DA. Remember, these kids are > doing NEWT level DADA as fifth years. Plus... the NEWT is a qualifying > exam. Is it possible he could take it years later after arriving in the > past? > > There is more... which a friend and I are working on. I don't see the > NEWT as a problem -- more like a Red Herring. Geoff: There was an occasion in "Star Trek: Deep Space Nine" when Miles O'Brien was talking to the Miles O'Brien from five hours in the future and, when things got very convoluted, he said "I hate Temporal Mechanics". Trying to get my head round this is giving me the same feeling. DD, who has gone back into the past as Ron, is coaching the present day Ron so that he can do his NEWTs so that he can go back into the past as DD. Hm. I think I will go and lie down in a quiet room for a while..... my head is hurting! :-) Geoff From angry_wangry at yahoo.co.uk Wed Nov 26 22:34:38 2003 From: angry_wangry at yahoo.co.uk (angry_wangry) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 22:34:38 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85945 Marci wrote: > Check out new info added to timeline and see if you agree. Input > appreciated. I see you've put the birth year(s) of Snape, Lupin, James, Sirius et al as 1955-6. I was just wondering how that was worked out? JKR said in an interview given just after GOF was released (therefore summer 95 in canon) that Snape was 35/36, which would have put his year of birth as 1959-1960, likewise the others in that year at Hogwarts. Mad -x- From nkafkafi at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 01:20:33 2003 From: nkafkafi at yahoo.com (nkafkafi) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 01:20:33 -0000 Subject: LV as a dementor? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85946 I sincerely apologize if I'm not the first to post this observation, but did anybody notice the slight change in the description of the patronous charm in OotP, and even more, the intriguing similarity between this description and Harry escaping VL possessing him? In chapter 1 of the book Harry is attacked by a dementor, which tries to "kiss" him. Harry, due to his state of mind, fails twice to perform the patronous charm. Now read JKR's description carefully: "There was laughter inside his own head, shrill, high-pitched laughter . . . he could smell the Dementor's putrid, death-cold breath filling his own lungs, drowning him ? think . . . something happy . . . But there was no happiness in him . . . the Dementor's icy fingers were closing on his throat ? the high-patched laughter was growing louder and louder, and a voice spoke inside his head: 'Bow to death, Harry . . . it might even be painless . . . I would not know . . . I have never died He was never going to see Ron and Hermione again ? And their faces burst clearly into his mind as he fought for breath. 'EXPECTO PATRONUM!' An enormous silver stag erupted from the tip of Harry's wand " Now, never seeing Ron and Hermione again is certainly not a happy thought, but just seeing their faces in Harry's mind somehow does the trick. Until now we were led to believe that the patronous charm is about happiness, but is it really about loving and/or being loved? This is not the same thing. Now compare the description above with the next description from chapter 36, at the battle in the MoM. VL finally manages to really posses Harry: "Then Harry's scar burst open and he knew he was dead: it was pain beyond imagining, pain past endurance ? ' He was gone from the hall, he was locked in the coils of a creature with red eyes, so tightly bound that Harry did not know where his body ended and the creatures began: they were fused together, bound by pain, and there was no escape ? ' And when the creature spoke, it used Harry's mouth, so that in his agony he felt his jaw move . . . 'Kill me now, Dumbledore . . .' Blinded and dying, every part of him screaming for release, Harry felt the creature use him again . . . 'If death is nothing, Dumbledore, kill the boy . . .' Let the pain stop, thought Harry . . . let him kill us . . . end it, Dumbledore . . . death is nothing compared to this . . . And I'll see Sirius again . . . And as Harry's heart filled with emotion, the creatures coils loosened, the pain was gone " Interestingly parallel, isn't it? In both cases Harry accepts his death. In both cases thinking about people he loves (or that love him?) saves him. The similarity between "he was never going to see Ron and Hermione again" and "and I'll see Sirius again" is just too good to be a coincidence. One might object that they are opposed, but this is because Ron and Hermione are alive, while Sirius is already dead. We know that thinking about Sirius is the thing that saved Harry from being possessed because DD says in the next chapter about (presumably) love: "It is the power held within that room that you possess in such quantities and which Voldemort has not at all. That power took you to save Sirius tonight. That power also saved you from possession by Voldemort, because he could not bear to reside in a body so full of the force he detests. In the end, it mattered not that you could not close your mind. It was your heart that saved you". So what does this similarity signifies? Did VL become a kind of dementor? What would happen if Harry performs the patronous charm against VL? We already know that the patronous is good for more than fighting dementors. It also repels the lethifold, a very dangerous dark creature, as Flavious Belby had found (FB). BTW, we don't know what Belby's patronous was, but it was also a horned animal, as he tells: "I looked up to see that the deadly shadow being thrown into the air upon the horns of my Patronous". Is this JKR's way to hint that this story is relevant to Harry? I would have hazard a prediction that this is how Harry is going to get rid of VL for good in book 7, but for one slight problem: the patronous does not kill dementors, nor does it kill the lethifold. It only repels them. Oh well. More ideas, anyone? Neri From kate_bag at hotmail.com Thu Nov 27 02:18:34 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 02:18:34 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85947 Art says, > According to Western law homicide is not murder when it is in > defence of one's own body or in defense of another person in > response to an initiation of force. > > In other words, Harry cannot morally go looking for a fight. He > must "kill" Voldemort during a battle that Voldemort initiates. > > Another quick note: Harry, in response to the prophecy, regards > the killing of Voldemort as "murder." There is no grey to his view. > That is a point that I believe lies at the heart of this adventure, > the "greying" of the rules that come with growing up. OR Harry is > already "premeditating" his murder of Voldemort. In that case, > maybe he shouldn't live past the end of the series.... I think Harry has every right to "premeditate", ponder, wish about Voldemort's death every day. Voldemort took Harry's parents away from him and, effectively, stole ten years of his life. He did this maliciously, with the intent of causing Harry harm at the same time. If somebody did that to me, I know I would want to cause whoever did it as much hurt as they did me. At the same time, however, I believe that there is no way for Harry to cause Voldemort this same kind of pain; Voldemort simply doesn't have the same emotional range as Harry does. Maybe this is what makes the difference... Whatever the outcome, I do not believe that Voldemort's death is murder. I don't hear anyone calling the deaths of Hitler or Saddam Hussein's sons murder...but that is another issue. Whether Harry is premeditating the death of Voldemort or not does not in any way change what I think of his morals, nor do I think that Harry cares too much what "Western law" says he morally can or can not do in this case. Harry has been chosen to be the executioner or the executed. I think that the choice on his part is easy enough, whether Voldemort starts the fight or not. ~Kate From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 04:23:39 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 04:23:39 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85948 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "allies426" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "augustinapeach" > wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zihav" wrote: > Narcissa to *know* that she's evil. I have no doubt > > > > > Now AP: > > > > But Kreacher went to Narcissa when Sirius ordered him out. And she > > apparently gave the information Kreacher told her about the > > relationship between Harry and Sirius to at least Lucius, maybe > > Voldemort himself, to help set into motion the plan that led to > Harry > > being lured to the MoM and Sirius' death. > > Now Allie again: > > UNLESS Kreacher went to Narcissa's house but only LUCIUS was home, > and Lucius was the one who alerted the DEs. I can't remember if DD > specifically said that Kreacher told Narcissa or if he just said that > he went to her house. I'm pretty sure it was Narcissa and will try to find the reference. She's a Black and Kreacher's closest connection with Bellatrix, who was in Azkaban at the time. I don't think Kreacher has any loyalty to Lucius, or any fear of him. What we need here is a canon reference and unfortunately I don't have time to look for it. (I've been cleaning house and baking pumpkin pies for company tomorrow. It's the American Thanksgiving. I could sure use a House Elf of my own, but not one like Kreacher. :-) ) Happy Thanksgiving to all Americans on the list. I imagine our presence will be rather sparse tomorrow. Carol From kcawte at ntlworld.com Thu Nov 27 12:30:04 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 04:30:04 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) References: Message-ID: <007601c3b4e2$2fc39020$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 85949 ~Kate > Whatever the outcome, I do not believe that Voldemort's death is > murder. I don't hear anyone calling the deaths of Hitler or Saddam > Hussein's sons murder...but that is another issue. Whether Harry is > premeditating the death of Voldemort or not does not in any way > change what I think of his morals, nor do I think that Harry cares > too much what "Western law" says he morally can or can not do in this > case. Harry has been chosen to be the executioner or the executed. > I think that the choice on his part is easy enough, whether Voldemort > starts the fight or not. K Regardless of what the law says Harry can't kill Voldemort unless it's in a fight of some kind. Harry doesn't have the right to decide that Voldemort deserves to die, regardless of what Voldemort has done in the past. (And btw Hitler committed suicide. If Saddam's sons were killed when they were unarmed then yes they were murdered, if they were resisting, then since America was at war it's somewhat justified). Ideally Harry should be able to bring Voldemort to justice somehow but the prophecy seems to make that unlikely. JKR seems to try and teach certain moral lessons in her books, I doubt she would undermine that by making her last point that killing is wrong, except when you decide someone deserves it. Voldemort has done Harry great harm in the past but that doesn't put Harry above any legal or moral considerations. He has no right to become judge, jury and executioner. K From LilDancinQT86 at aol.com Thu Nov 27 04:08:41 2003 From: LilDancinQT86 at aol.com (theredshoes86) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 04:08:41 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore & Harry's security In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85950 > "theredshoes86": > So.... maybe... Dumbledore invisibly follows Harry around the > school. eiffelangel wrote: > The book says that Dumbledore means > "bumblebee" in olde english. What does this have to do with > anything? Piece of proof #2: Riddle says that Dumbledore was > his transfiguration teacher. McGonagall is the current teacher, > and she can turn into a cat. It seems to imply that in order to > teach Transfigurastion, you must be able to transfigure yourself. > Since Riddle would have no reason to lie abut which class > Dumbledore taught, I am assuming (for the time being) that we > can trust him on this one. I can only conclude that Dumbledoe > can turn into a bee, if not some kind of insect. Re-read and note > all of the instances when Harry or someone else hears a bug > (and it may not be Rita Skeeter). If you ask me, this would be a > guise fit for the omniscient professor. Who would suspect a fly in > their room of being the ever-present Headmaster? On page 725 in The Order of the Phoenix, when they're taking their O.W.L.S: "... Harry stared fixedly at the first question. It was several seconds before it occurred to him that he had not taken in a word of it; there was a wasp buzzing distractingly against one of the high windows..." I'M VERY SURE that Rowling wouldn't have included that bit if it wasn't important. It's one of those details that you don't pay any attention to, and then after reading later books, you re-read the older ones and catch clues. This is definitely a clue. I think. (: Any comments????? "theredshoes86" From LilDancinQT86 at aol.com Thu Nov 27 04:22:42 2003 From: LilDancinQT86 at aol.com (theredshoes86) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 04:22:42 -0000 Subject: HP & Greek Tragedy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85951 My English teacher had been saying something about Greek tragedy, and my thoughts were floating around as always, but I caught this part: 1. lovable and believable hero 2. extremely unusual circumstances 3. battles with the strong forces of fate and destiny 4. a tragic even happens near the end 5. people are reunited and things are resolved in a way Sound similar to Harry Potter???? I think so. Tell me what you think. (: laura (theredshoes86) From mpjdekker at hotmail.com Thu Nov 27 04:32:05 2003 From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 04:32:05 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85952 >>> Kneasy wrote: >>> Why not unforgivable curses? After all they are only >>> unforgivable when used against *people* and Voldy is no longer >>> human. >> >> Then Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote: >> This comes up ALL THE TIME. Can you, Kneasy, or someone else >> PLEASE enlighten me as to why this is true? I myself have stated >> that I believe he has chosen a life which is less than truly >> LIVING...but I cannot get a handle on where people get it that >> either 1) Voldy is not a human being; or 2) Voldy is immortal. >> What have I missed? > > To which Kneasy replied: > Pleased to. You must have skipped over it somehow. > GoF, graveyard scene, Voldy addressing the returned DEs. > > > There is also Hagrid's comment is PS/SS: "Some say he died. Codswallop, in my opinion. Dunno if he had enough human left in him to die." I do however wonder about the morality of Kneasy's statement that it's okay to use the unforgivable curses on Voldemort just as long as he is no longer human. It's precisely this sort of attitude that results in resentment among the non-humans. -Maus From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 04:34:33 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 04:34:33 -0000 Subject: Ollivander/Wands(was-Voldemort's next move) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85953 > wrote: > Barring a heretofore-unmentioned Wand Shop in Knockturn Alley, > Ollivander's is the place you go when you need a wand. All the escapees > needed wands and got them. Thus, so far, Ollivander supplied them. > And there is that troublesome anagram -- An Evil Lord -- for Ollivander. > > ARYA wrote: > Granted in PS, Hagrid does say, "Just Ollivanders left now--only place for > wands, Ollivanders, and yeh gotta have the best wand." But Hagrid says lots > of off things and this could mean it's the only place in Diagon Alley, in London > or just in the UK. > I read the passage differently: "Just Ollivander's left" means that's the only errand he and Harry have left to do and "only place for wands" doesn't mean that it's literally the only wand shop in London/Diagon Alley, just that it's the best and therefore the only one worth going to. It's like saying "only place for a steak in this town." There may be other places to buy steak, but not in the opinion of the speaker. Carol From two4menone4you88 at aol.com Thu Nov 27 04:44:39 2003 From: two4menone4you88 at aol.com (yairadubin) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 04:44:39 -0000 Subject: Metamorphagi Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85954 Forgive me if this has already been brought up but I searched the archives and nothing came up. In OOTP, when the wizards burst in to take Harry to the OOTP headquarters Tonks tells Harry that metamorphagi are really rare and they're born not made. Then she says that most wizards have to use a wand to alter thier appearances. Well, in SS/PS, in the beginning it says that Aunt Petunia cut all his hair off once and he grew it all back in one night. Well, he altered his appearance without a wand. Is it possible that Harry could be a metamorphagi and the seemingly unimportant anecdote from Book 1 is really a huge clue? (Sorry I have no exact page numbers - I don't have my books right now.) *Yaira* From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Wed Nov 26 22:14:49 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 22:14:49 +0000 Subject: Chess Theory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FC525D9.7060104@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85955 iris_ft wrote: > Iris: > Your post is wonderful, and easy to understand. Great > work! Thanks, I'm still refining the thing. > > Angel: > > The Game > > > > The first thing that strikes me is the chilling metaphor between > > the chess game and life. > > Iris: > Right. And there's also a parallel between the chess game in PS/SS > and the fourth book of the series. I'm looking at the chess game in one reflecting both the whole series and possibly the last four books in particular. My thinking is that all the players are now on the board, which suggests that the game in earnest begins with the chapter 'the beginning' in GoF. > > Angel: > > When Harry walks into the chess room, the pieces > > have all healed themselves, and returned to their original > > positions just as if nothing has happened. If Evil is White and > > Good is Dark, it shows that the war will continue as if the battle > > has never happened, as the pieces are faceless - there are no details, > > just that one side has to win, and then they're all back to how they > > were. > > Iris: > Exactly. Harry defeated Voldemort when he was a baby but it didn't > change anything in the way the WW's organisation. The result of that > inertia is the new raise of Voldemort, that will probably be > defeated twice but will come back again and again (he or another > Dark Lord, the name doesn't really matter, the Beast is still the > Beast)if nothing changes this time. > Now look at what happens in Book 4. At the end of GoF, the WW acts > just as if nothing had happened during the last task of the > Tournament. It isn't enough to win the game, you need to blow up the chess set. Human Nature is human Nature. What sent shivers down my spine was the way that, after Harry smashed the office it went back to being just as it was before, much like the chess set. > > Angel: > > In part, it's also a metaphor for death - Harry experiences losing > > Ron, and having to go on without him not knowing if he's still alive. > > In much the same way Sirius' death evokes a similar response. Harry > > has to go on with the game, whether he likes it or not. > > Iris: > "That"s chess, says Ron in Book 1,"You've got to make some > sacrifices!" > And we can say that the chess game in PS/SS is a metaphor of what > happens in GoF. Harry looses temporarily Ron as a friend. The scenes > in the graveyard are scenes of human sacrifice. Cedric is murdered, > Wortail has to give his flesh and Harry has to give his blood. I get the feeling that this is going to be see on a grander scale. It's interesting that Harry does without Hermione in book 2, and Ron in book 4. In a calculating way they're 'just' pieces. > > Angel: > > Chess can be seen as a metaphor for life - for every action there > > is an equal and opposite reaction, although there will evidently be > > individual perturbations. > > Iris: > In GoF, it works exactly like that. One example: for Harry and > Cedric acting loyally, there is Moody/Crouch Jr acting as a traitor. > As for the "individual perturbations", we can take the example of > Harry'psychological suffering. By the way, does Voldemort suffer > because of Harry's blood running through his veins? I hope so... I was thinking along the lines that in chess there are a limited number of viable moves to successfully respond and contain a particular attack. > > Angel: > > The DEs being white is a curious thing, as white initially suggests > > purity, sterility even. But consider - the likes of Lucius seem to > > exist quite openly, in the light. (skip) > > Iris: > You give yourself the explanation: white suggests purity and > sterility. Now who are the Death Eaters? They are purebloods, > obsessed with their pure lineage. Just the kind of behaviour that > leads to sterility (not only biological, but also cultural, > psychological, etc). And you add in your post that the White pieces > always play first. It's what happens in GoF: the Death Eaters play > first, and so does Evil. At the end of the book, we realize that the > whole action has been manipulated by Voldemort. He always > anticipated his action, he always played first. Thanks. It's like what McG says about DD. That he has the powers, but he's too noble to use them. > Iris: > (Big big skip), because I don't have the time to comment what you > write about the pieces. I 'd just want to know something. You call > Hermione "the Rook", but JKr calls her "the Castle" in PS/SS > (Bloomsbury paperback). Which word do chess players use more oftenly? > Thanks for your post and for the help it provides, Both, interchangeably. Rook is an interesting name for Hermione, because of her intelligence, and the fact that she concsidered Ravenclaw. It's often an omen of death in literature, while a castle is solid, albeit draughty. "Angel" From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Wed Nov 26 22:34:17 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 22:34:17 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chess Theory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FC52A69.8000101@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85956 hickengruendler wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Angel Moules > wrote: > > > > > The Game > > > > The first thing that strikes me is the chilling metaphor between > the > > chess game and life. When Harry walks into the chess room, the > pieces > > have all healed themselves, and returned to their original > positions > > just as if nothing has happened. If Evil is White and Good is > Dark, > > A short comment: If this is a reference to the chess game from book > 1, than white isn't evil. It just seems so, because the trio played > with the black figures. But the white site is the one who protected > the stone. Therefore, it is the good side. Quirrell had to play with > black, too. The White is now protecting Quirrellmort. The white lets whoever past that can play its way across, not caring how good or bad that individual is. It harms the players that come through. In some ways white could also be a metaphor for the ministry. > > > In part, it's also a metaphor for death - Harry experiences losing > Ron, > > and having to go on without him not knowing if he's still alive. In > much > > the same way Sirius' death evokes a similar response. Harry has to > go on > > with the game, whether he likes it or not. > > I agree. Harry has to continue, no matter how much it costs. THis could be interesting in the later books - Harry has a ruthless streak that is only starting to come into its own. > > > > > The Pieces > > > > Canon gives us the positions of Harry, Ron and Hermione from the > chess > > game. I'm assuming that the three of them begin as the King side > pieces. > > No matter which part he played in the chess game in PS, Harry is the > king. He is the one, who must be protected to all costs. The moment > the King (Harry) is killed, Voldemort has won the game. The only > other (but less likely) alternative for the King is Neville, as the > other prophecy boy. Dumbledore would be the queen, the most powerful > figure. I don't like this, because the nature of Evil is that it doesn't get its hands dirty, it lets others do it for them. Dumbledore sets himself up as the main counter part to Voldemort, however: 1. Dumbledore is not powerful enough to destroy LV utterly. A Queen would be able to do that. Kings, however, can't get within a square of each other. Voldemort and Harry in GoF can touch each other. c.f. a bishop being in close proximity to the king, but not on the same diagonal. 2. Harry moves around, gets into the thick of things, but isn't powerful enough to be the queen. He is protected by the queen, but has influence in his own right. Kings are in the background, their influence isn't immediately felt - DD is only a background figure in Harry's life for msot of the time. Harry's influence is felt through the wizarding world. 3. Neville is better as a pawn, because, like the king, he can only move one step at a time, but will, ultimately be more powerful than the king. Pawns are frequently overlooked as being modest pieces, but can be critical to a game. "Angel" From LilDancinQT86 at aol.com Thu Nov 27 04:54:18 2003 From: LilDancinQT86 at aol.com (theredshoes86) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 04:54:18 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85957 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Louis Badalament" > wrote: > > > > Louis - My Question; > > > > Has Harry now become as close a friend with Neville, Luna, and Ginny > > as he is with Hermione and Ron? Which is to say, will we see these > > three also trailing around with him wherever he goes? > > I think he will > especially seek out Luna in times when he is most troubled, because > she has a calm and a detachment that he can trust. He knows if he > reveals some internal aspect of himself, Luna is not going to freak > out and get all emotional. By not feeling the need to guard Luna's > feels and thereby his own, he will feel very comfortable around her. I AGREE with you completely!!!! I couldn't have said it better myself. Luna will definately become closer to Harry. There is a strong significance of Rowling having LUNA talk with Harry at the end about death. Harry didn't feel comfortable around anyone, until he talked with Luna about the veil. There must also be some meaning behind Luna's name, Luna meaning the moon. I haven't quite had enough time to ponder about that, but there is definately a signifigance. Your thoughts???? laura (theredshoes86) From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Thu Nov 27 05:30:25 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 05:30:25 -0000 Subject: Headmaster Ron In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85958 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says Whoa. I thought *I* was a crackpot! No, no, I wasn't thinking time travel. I was just thinking Ron is an intellectual late bloomer who grows up to be Hogwarts Headmaster, and along the way we find out that the Weasleys are related to the Dumbledores. My head hurts too. --JDR From silverdragon at ezweb.com.au Thu Nov 27 04:06:02 2003 From: silverdragon at ezweb.com.au (silverdragon at ezweb.com.au) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 14:06:02 +1000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Quidditch commentator References: Message-ID: <000201c3b4a9$a56ad2e0$76984cca@Monteith> No: HPFGUIDX 85959 > > > Dmoorehpnc > > > Three Cheers for Creevey > > > Creevey! Creevey! Creevey! I think Colin Creevey would be an > > > excellent choice. Who worships Harry more than him? > > > > > > > Just think of it. A whole new way for Colin to drive Harry > > absolutely nuts! All those embarrassing comments Harry doesn't want > > others to hear... > > > > Ravenclaw Bookworm Wouldn't the commentry be *awfully* boring with the Creevy's doing it? "And it's Harry, looking for the snitch. Someone scored - dunno who - but Harry is flying to the other end of the pitch. And Harry is diving, looks like he's after the snitch! Looks like someone has the quaffle, but Harry...." Nox From journalisto at hotmail.com Thu Nov 27 06:33:12 2003 From: journalisto at hotmail.com (The Journalist) Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 22:33:12 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Quidditch commentator References: <000201c3b4a9$a56ad2e0$76984cca@Monteith> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85960 Nox: Wouldn't the commentry be *awfully* boring with the Creevy's doing it? "And it's Harry, looking for the snitch. Someone scored - dunno who - but Harry is flying to the other end of the pitch. And Harry is diving, looks like he's after the snitch! Looks like someone has the quaffle, but Harry...." === Perhaps there could be trial commentators--that is, a whole variety of people (Luna, Colin, etc.) get a shot at the mic for a couple games. JKR could have a lot of fun with that... -Dan [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 07:56:08 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 07:56:08 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85961 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" wrote: > K wrote: > > >On a related note Ginny makes a comment about wanting to go to > Hogwarts since Bill got his letter - is that even possible? Would > she have been born when Bill was 11?< > > KathyK: > > Ginny says (CoS, US 323): > > "I've looked forward to coming to Hogwarts ever since > B-Bill came" > > ...edited... I don't think she was referring specifically to the > time Bill began at Hogwarts but more generally to the time Bill > was there. > I may be off but that's how I interpreted her statement. > > KathyK bboy_mn: I think we have to interpret it that way, otherwise, the statement is inconsistent with everything else we know. We have to choose between explanations that make the Potterverse work, and those that make it 'not work'. I think Ginny is implying that she has wanted to go ever since she became aware of Bill going. It's not that often that I'm exposed to young kids, so this is just a guess, but I would think she would have to be 2 or 3 years old at least to be suffciently aware to understand the world around her. Just a thought. bboy_mn From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 08:15:15 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 08:15:15 -0000 Subject: Timeline - Charlie - The Legend or the Experience? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85962 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote: > Troels Forchhammer: > > As far as I can find it was McGonagall who compared Harry to > > Charlie, > > > > 'He caught that thing in his hand after a fifty-foot dive,' > > Professor McGonagall told Wood. 'Didn't even scratch himself. > > Charlie Weasley couldn't have done it.' > > > > Unless it was another passage that I didn't find, that you thought > > of? > > > Erin: > It was this one: > > "That Quidditch cup'll have our name on it this year," said Wood > happily as they trudged back up to the castle. "I wouldn't be > surprised if you turn out to be better than Charlie Weasley, and he > could have played for England if he hadn't gone off chasing > dragons." > > PS/SS Ch.10, p.170 hardback American edition > > Erin bboy_mn: I take that statement to be sufficiently vague, that I see no need to conclude from it that Wood has seen Charlie play. Wood could just as easily be speaking of 'the legend' of Charlie Weasley rather than the actual experience of having seen him fly. If you insist on it being an experience, here is a perfectly logical explaination. Wood is a Quidditch nut, an obssessed fan, and always has been. So Wood's father, as a special treat, took him to the Quidditch final game at Hogwarts the year before Wood started school. It was an opportunity for Wood to be introduced to Quidditch at Hogwarts and to see the school before actually attending it as a student. Perhaps, his father brought Wood to several Quidditch finals as Wood came closer to Hogwarts age and become more enthusiastic about attending school. Alternately, perhaps Wood, as a young boy, was reluctant to leave home and go to school. So his father took him to a school Quidditch game to show him what a fun time school would be. The point is that Woods statement is sufficiently vague that no conclusion can be draw from it, and I don't see it as forcing us to view alternate data in a different light. Absent this 'evidence', the other clues create a relatively consistent timeline. Just a thought. bboy_mn From patientx3 at aol.com Thu Nov 27 09:53:06 2003 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 09:53:06 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS - Chapter 6 - The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85963 Claire wrote: > 11) If pure bloods are so limited that they have to intermarry, and > Molly and Arthur are related to the Blacks, shouldn't some Weasley > ancestor be on the family tree? Surely they couldn't all be "blood > traitors". Marianne replied: >>I think the tapestry leaves us with a lot of questions. If one assumes that Slytherin is made up of mostly pure-bloods, then shouldn't Snape's name have also been on the tapestry? You'd think that name would have caught Harry's eye, as would the names Weasley or Potter...Either we'll discover at a later time that these names really are here and Harry just didn't notice, or this is one of the many details we obsess over that is of no importance to JKR.<< HunterGreen: Its exteremly curious that both Snape and Potter not in the tapestry. I can almost understand the Snape thing (for some reason I have this thought that his family is from a different WW 'circle', like out of country or something--that could even been the cause of some of his social problems), but its odd that the Potters aren't on there. I can't see Sirius either not mentioning it or never noticing (he probably looking *specifically* for a Potter relative at some point as a teenager, I know I would if there was a chance I was [albeit distantly] related to my best friend). If there was one I don't see why he wouldn't make a point of mentioning it to Harry....unless there's some reason for him NOT to. -HunterGreen. From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Thu Nov 27 12:32:55 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 12:32:55 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85964 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mightymaus75" > > I do however wonder about the morality of Kneasy's statement that > it's okay to use the unforgivable curses on Voldemort just as long as > he is no longer human. It's precisely this sort of attitude that > results in resentment among the non-humans. > It's not a question of morality, it's a matter of canon. And the canon is fictional fantasy, not a civics textbook. Whether you agree with it or not, it is the standard to be adhered to in the WW and defined as such by the author. A bit of a rant here; it's been brewing for some time and if I delay much longer the safety valve may blow. It's not aimed at any named posters, but reflects thoughts on a trend that seems to becoming more prevalent. I don't know about you, but in the stygian gloom of the midnight hour I sometimes worry about the writers of some previous posts who seem to have difficulty distinguishing between the two and extrapolate fictional constructs into the real world. That small hard core that seem to consider themselves to be the uncontested and unimpeachable moral arbiters of everything and everybody, including the author. "This is not right," they declaim, drawing their rectitude around them. I, on the other hand, take a different view. "Where is JK going with this?" I ask myself. "What is she up to? Can I second guess her? Why is this like that?" I consider, I hope, that this is what HPfGU is all about. I really don't see it as a notice board where posters vie with each other to proclaim their personal moral absolutes, which are probably not applicable anyway. I shook the dust of the lecture room from my feet almost forty years ago and have no wish to be on the receiving end of a fresh onslaught of words telling me what to think and why I mustn't say this or that. I hope that you have noticed that though I often disagree with theories on the site, I still treat them for what they are - theories. They may be right, they may not. What is very different is a post that tells me I am morally wrong when I take a particular line with a plot development because it does not conform to the tenets of some real world philosophy. I consider that to be a personal assault on my ethical integrity. Of course, we can all draw parallels between the behaviour of imaginary characters, situations, etc. and our world, that, after all, is one of the functions of fiction. But many of the parallels are of our own choosing, mostly the result of our individual social conditioning. It is not reasonable to demand that a make-believe world *must* reflect any individual's personal view. I for one do not confuse the Potterverse with a political tract seeking to impose alien standards on my personal ethics. IMO Voldy has been deliberately set up as a non-human entity, as the essence of evil, to enable him to be destroyed without qualms. That is a morality nearly everyone can approve of. Similarly, I like to think that there must be a loophole in the laws governing the use of unforgivable curses to allow the good side to meet the chief baddy and his band on something like equal terms. Personally, I have no problem with it; after all, I'm unlikely to have to defend my opinions by being confronted with an irate Goblin at my Bank . Others, it seems, see themselves as pure-hearted moral guardians of the unreal, proponents of real world rights for the imaginary, defenders against invented wrongs, castigators of those that play at "what if?" I am not impressed nor am I persuaded. Kneasy From Zarleycat at aol.com Thu Nov 27 15:00:59 2003 From: Zarleycat at aol.com (kiricat2001) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 15:00:59 -0000 Subject: Can a Locked Door Stop an Elf? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85966 In reading the Chapter Six summary, it is mentioned that Ron locks the door of the bedroom he shares with Harry because he doesn't want Kreacher to be able to wander in in the middle of the night. Why would a locked door stop Kreacher, if he really wanted to get in? We've seen Dobby apparate (or whatever that mode of transport is called for elves) into and out of Privet Drive, into and out of the Hospital in CoS. So it seems that elves have that ability. Fred and George apparate into the bedroom in Chapter six, so the house does not have anti-apparition wards on the inside. Yet, Ron thinks locking the door will keep Kreacher out. Is Ron merely exhibiting ignorance of elf powers? Is Kreacher only able to enter rooms by walking into them? Maybe so - IIRC we always see him come into a room by shuffling in through the doorway. Is this a tiny flint? Would I be better off spending my time basting the turkey??? Marianne From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Thu Nov 27 15:06:01 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 09:06:01 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Quidditch commentator In-Reply-To: <000201c3b4a9$a56ad2e0$76984cca@Monteith> Message-ID: <000401c3b4f7$fc633df0$4997aec7@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 85967 >Nox > >Wouldn't the commentary be *awfully* boring with the Creevy's doing it? "And >it's Harry, looking for the snitch. Someone scored - dunno who - but Harry >is flying to the other end of the pitch. And Harry is diving, looks like >he's after the snitch! Looks like someone has the quaffle, but Harry...." > Iggy here: *laugh* Ya know, I think you're right. That's probably the way the Creevy's would comment on the matches. Personally, I still think that Luna Lovegood would be the best. On the other hand, I just thought of someone who might actually have the potential to make a great Quidditch commentator now that he's breaking out of his shell. Neville Longbottom. Just as Harry is a natural at the game, now that Neville is going to start blossoming and gaining self confidence, I think it would be cool for us to find out that he's an amazingly adept color commentator. Especially if Professor MacGonagall decides to nudge him along in that confidence by assigning him the job, whether he asks for it or not. I can see the first game or two being a little awkward, but once he gets the hang of it and gets into the mood of the matches... watch out! It would also be a great plot device to help put Neville more into the public view of his fellow students, just as Harry is. It would begin bringing them more and more on an equal level. Any comments? Iggy McSnurd (Who is happy to finally be off moderated newbie status. Woohoo!!!) PS: Happy Thanksgiving to any of us who celebrate it. *grin* From catherinemck at hotmail.com Thu Nov 27 15:18:37 2003 From: catherinemck at hotmail.com (catherinemckiernan) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 15:18:37 -0000 Subject: Quidditch commentator In-Reply-To: <20031123141722.42889.qmail@web40019.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85968 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Paula Gaon wrote: > 23Nov03 > > "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > > Who do you think! will get Lee Jordan's job now that he's left > Hogwarts? The Quidditch games won't be the same without a witty > commmentator... Any (obvious) candidates?... > > > Paula now (better late than never): > Right you are! This has bothered me too, but I'd always imagined that JKR would have a girl commentator in the next book. Let's see, how about Luna Lovegood. She'd surely calm the masses. I don't see that the Slytherine/Gryffindor rivalry will let up, and she is a Ravenclaw, therefore a little impartial. I've always had a suspicion that there's a quirky sense of humor in her somewhere too. Maybe she's just what Hogwart's needs now. Remember the Sorting Hat's warning to ban together. Or, if you've a taste for drama--what about Pansy Parkinson? Since there are no girls on Slytherine's team, she be their token female. Oh, boy, this could really galvanize Hermione's ethusiasm for Quidditch. I could imagine some real action from this choice. Finally, maybe one of the Patil twins. They're both pretty even personalities and probably wouldn't offend anybody. Gee, my imagination's going wild! Can't wait to find out. > > ~Paula "Griff" Gaon > Me: I agree it ought to be a girl, and in the interests of house fairness (yeah, right) a non-Gryffindor. My vote goes to Pansy Parkinson. "And Ginny Weasley takes the quaffle...nice flying there, pity the robes clash with her hair...Is that the Snitch? Yes! Malfoy dives, but Potter's after him. It's Malfoy in the lead. Malfoy...Malfoy...can he hold on? Yes, Malfoy, yes, yes, yes, YES!!!! Slytherin scores." Catherine McK From t.forch at mail.dk Thu Nov 27 16:54:58 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 17:54:58 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031127174813.050fddb0@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 85969 At 22:34 26-11-03 +0000, you wrote: >Marci wrote: > > Check out new info added to timeline and see if you agree. Input > > appreciated. > > >I see you've put the birth year(s) of Snape, Lupin, James, Sirius et >al as 1955-6. I was just wondering how that was worked out? > >JKR said in an interview given just after GOF was released >(therefore summer 95 in canon) It is normally assumed that this statement refers to his age in GoF, and I certainly agree that this appears most likely. There is of course the question of whether it is the start, mid or the end of the book, if we want to be exact, so there's an extra year of uncertainty there - making Snape 20 - 22 years older than Harry. It is, however, not specified that this age is valid for GoF, so it is, IMO, possible to interpret it differently. Other possible (though, IMO, much less likely) interpretations are that the age is valid for either the start or the end of the series, making Snape 24 - 25 years older or 17 - 18 years older than Harry. The same would of course apply for James, and the youngest estimate would then require that he became a father before or immediately after leaving Hogwarts, which does sound rather unlikely. /Troels From two4menone4you88 at aol.com Thu Nov 27 17:14:56 2003 From: two4menone4you88 at aol.com (two4menone4you88 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 12:14:56 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mark Evans Message-ID: <132.27f1b096.2cf78b10@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85970 Mark Evans would be related from Lily's side of the family, which taken at face-value are muggles, so if mark is related to Harry he'd be a muggle and that would be why the ministry had no record of him. He could still play a part in the later books and the war with voldemort, showing that everyone needs to combine to defeat him, even muggles. *Yaira* [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kate_bag at hotmail.com Thu Nov 27 06:08:17 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 06:08:17 -0000 Subject: Dumbledore & Harry's security In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85971 eiffelangel: I can only conclude that Dumbledoe > > can turn into a bee, if not some kind of insect. Re-read and note > > all of the instances when Harry or someone else hears a bug > > (and it may not be Rita Skeeter). If you ask me, this would be a > > guise fit for the omniscient professor. Who would suspect a fly in > > their room of being the ever-present Headmaster? > now theredshoe86: > On page 725 in The Order of the Phoenix, when they're taking their > O.W.L.S: > "... Harry stared fixedly at the first question. It was several > seconds before it occurred to him that he had not taken in a word of > it; there was a wasp buzzing distractingly against one of the high > windows..." > I'M VERY SURE that Rowling wouldn't have included that bit if it wasn't > important. It's one of those details that you don't pay any attention > to, and then after reading later books, you re-read the older ones and > catch clues. This is definitely a clue. I think. (: Any comments????? Now Me: Interesting, I never thought of this before...but now that you mention it, there is a related quote that jumps into my mind straight away. At the end of OoP when Dumbledore is trying to explain to Harry why it was that he never told the truth about the prophecy, he says "I defy anyone who has watched you as I have - and I have watched you more closely than you can have imagined..."(739 UK ed.). Has Dumbledore been visiting Privit Drive for years? It wouldn't surprise me if he had the ability...as Dumbledore is commonly referred to the most powerful wizard of this age, it is unlikely that there is *any* spell out of Dumbledore's abilities, least of all a spell mastered by James, Serius and Pettegrew in their fifth year. I bet if you went through each book closely enough you would find many hints that suggest something of this nature... ~Kate From kate_bag at hotmail.com Thu Nov 27 06:31:13 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 06:31:13 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: <007601c3b4e2$2fc39020$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85972 > K says > > Regardless of what the law says Harry can't kill Voldemort unless it's in a > fight of some kind. Harry doesn't have the right to decide that Voldemort > deserves to die, regardless of what Voldemort has done in the past. (And btw > Hitler committed suicide. If Saddam's sons were killed when they were > unarmed then yes they were murdered, if they were resisting, then since > America was at war it's somewhat justified). Now Me: The Hitler point was only an example, albeit a poor one...it was the closest thing I could think of to a RW equivalent of Voldemort... However, is the wizarding world not at war with Voldemort? It seems that way to me....forgive me, but your own logic seems to point in my favour...Harry would be "somewhat justified" if he killed Voldemort then? (I personally don't think anyone would complain in the WW if he did....) K again: Voldemort has done Harry > great harm in the past but that doesn't put Harry above any legal or moral > considerations. He has no right to become judge, jury and executioner. > > K Me again: My point is that Harry *is* the judge, jury and executioner...it says so in the prophecy. Kill or be killed. End of story. Life or Death situation. Maybe the end won't be as clear cut as that, maybe JKR will throw us another curve ball (for the record I hope she does), but in the meantime it looks as though one of these two characters is going to end up dead, and it's just a question of which. Voldemort has done almost *every* family great harm in the past, not just Harry. V doesn't care that he has ruined countless lives...why should it be considered immoral for Harry to kill him if given the chance, provoked or not? If Harry didn't kill Voldemort, would the other lives that would undoubtably come to an end as a result of Voldemort's continued reign not then fall on Harry's shoulders? It's not like Voldemort can just be locked up or anything. He can't be put into jail and rehabilitated. He's not just going to decide one day that he doesn't want to try to rule the wizarding world anymore. It's just not going to happen. This is not a question of morals anymore. It is a question of survival. Kill the virus, or succumb to it. Haven't you seen 28 Days Later? ;) ~Kate (who, for the record, in case it wasn't clear, won't think of Harry as a murderer if he kills Voldemort, whether he intends to or not.) From kate_bag at hotmail.com Thu Nov 27 06:39:41 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 06:39:41 -0000 Subject: Quidditch commentator In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85974 Dan said, > Perhaps there could be trial commentators--that is, a whole variety of people (Luna, Colin, etc.) get a shot at the mic for a couple games. JKR could have a lot of fun with that... > I think that it would be good for JKR to experiment like that...it seems to me that Rowling might be getting tired of writing Quidditch chapters. In GoF, Quidditch was foregone completely, and in OoP, she changed it up a bit with Harry in the spectator's seat for a change...it probably is getting a bit boring for her. I mean, there's only so many times you can make up a pretend game of Quidditch without it getting incredibly boring (for the writer that is...) New players and commentators, however, will probably spice things up a bit. I guess we'll see... ~Kate From mpjdekker at hotmail.com Thu Nov 27 17:56:16 2003 From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 17:56:16 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85975 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mightymaus75" > > > I do however wonder about the morality of Kneasy's statement that > > it's okay to use the unforgivable curses on Voldemort just as > > long as he is no longer human. It's precisely this sort of > > attitude that results in resentment among the non-humans. > > > > It's not a question of morality, it's a matter of canon. > And the canon is fictional fantasy, not a civics textbook. > Whether you agree with it or not, it is the standard to be adhered > to in the WW and defined as such by the author. > > A bit of a rant here; it's been brewing for some time and if I > delay much longer the safety valve may blow. It's not aimed at any > named posters, but reflects thoughts on a trend that seems to > becoming more prevalent. > > I don't know about you, but in the stygian gloom of the midnight > hour I sometimes worry about the writers of some previous posts who > seem to have difficulty distinguishing between the two and > extrapolate fictional constructs into the real world. That small > hard core that seem to consider themselves to be the uncontested > and unimpeachable moral arbiters of everything and everybody, > including the author. > > "This is not right," they declaim, drawing their rectitude around > them. I, on the other hand, take a different view. "Where is JK > going with this?" I ask myself. "What is she up to? Can I second > guess her? Why is this like that?" I consider, I hope, that this > is what HPfGU is all about. I really don't see it as a notice > board where posters vie with each other to proclaim their personal > moral absolutes, which are probably not applicable anyway. > > I shook the dust of the lecture room from my feet almost forty > years ago and have no wish to be on the receiving end of a fresh > onslaught of words telling me what to think and why I mustn't say > this or that. I hope that you have noticed that though I often > disagree with theories on the site, I still treat them for what > they are - theories. They may be right, they may not. What is very > different is a post that tells me I am morally wrong when I take a > particular line with a plot development because it does not conform > to the tenets of some real world philosophy. I consider that to be > a personal assault on my ethical integrity. > > Of course, we can all draw parallels between the behaviour of > imaginary characters, situations, etc. and our world, that, after > all, is one of the functions of fiction. But many of the parallels > are of our own choosing, mostly the result of our individual social > conditioning. It is not reasonable to demand that a make-believe > world *must* reflect any individual's personal view. I for one do > not confuse the Potterverse with a political tract seeking to > impose alien standards on my personal ethics. > > IMO Voldy has been deliberately set up as a non-human entity, as > the essence of evil, to enable him to be destroyed without qualms. > That is a morality nearly everyone can approve of. Similarly, I > like to think that there must be a loophole in the laws governing > the use of unforgivable curses to allow the good side to meet the > chief baddy and his band on something like equal terms. > > Personally, I have no problem with it; after all, I'm unlikely to > have to defend my opinions by being confronted with an irate Goblin > at my Bank . > > Others, it seems, see themselves as pure-hearted moral guardians > of the unreal, proponents of real world rights for the imaginary, > defenders against invented wrongs, castigators of those that play > at "what if?" > > I am not impressed nor am I persuaded. > > Kneasy Actually that was me applying fictional ethical principles to the real world. I would never dare to impose my real world views on JKR to tell her what she can and cannot write. While you may not feel that the original comment was really applicable to you, personally I feel rather strong about the Centaur and Goblin rights to life being trampled here. -Maus From kcawte at ntlworld.com Fri Nov 28 02:04:25 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 18:04:25 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) References: Message-ID: <001201c3b554$02c60cc0$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 85976 > Now ~Kate > The Hitler point was only an example, albeit a poor one...it was the > closest thing I could think of to a RW equivalent of Voldemort... > > However, is the wizarding world not at war with Voldemort? It seems > that way to me....forgive me, but your own logic seems to point in my > favour...Harry would be "somewhat justified" if he killed Voldemort > then? (I personally don't think anyone would complain in the WW if > he did....) > > K I said that killinng someone in a war *when they are fighting back* is justified. Not just killing them if they are unarmed and not resisting. I said that killing Voldemort in a fight was fine but killing him in cold blood when he wasn't doing anything wasn't. There's is no inconsistency in that arguement. > K again: > Voldemort has done Harry > > great harm in the past but that doesn't put Harry above any legal > or moral > > considerations. He has no right to become judge, jury and > executioner. > > > > K > > Kate again: > My point is that Harry *is* the judge, jury and executioner...it says > so in the prophecy. Kill or be killed. End of story. Life or Death > situation. > K The Prophecy is a prediction of what is going to happen (possibly - predictions throughout mythology have proven to be somewhat tricky things) not a decree from on high. It doesn't give Harry any special rights. He may end up in a position where he has to kill Voldemort but the choice is his. If Voldemort is for some reason not trying to kill anyone at the time (presumably he would have to have been beaten in afight for this to happen) and Harry kills him that is cold blooded murder. You say that Voldemort has done things to Harry in the past which make it justified for Harry to kill him. I say that that is vigilanteism. No individual has the right to decide to cold bloodedly kill someone just because, in their opinion, they deserve it. I refuse to believe that after the moral lessons and such that we have seen in the books (our choices are what define us, discriminating against other 'racial groups' is wrong etc) the finale is going to say that killing someone is OK if you're a hero normally and anyway he was a really bad person. Indeed the theme of love and sacrifice seems stronger in the books. I think it far more likely that Harry will try and sacrifice himself in some way to somehow 'save' Voldemort. Kate If Harry didn't kill Voldemort, would the other > lives that would undoubtably come to an end as a result of > Voldemort's continued reign not then fall on Harry's shoulders? > K No of course they wouldn't. Our choices are important. Harry is responsible for only his own choice of whether or not to kill Voldemort. Voldemort is responsible for his choice to go on killing if he were to survive. Kate > It's not like Voldemort can just be locked up or anything. He can't > be put into jail and rehabilitated. He's not just going to decide > one day that he doesn't want to try to rule the wizarding world > anymore. It's just not going to happen. > K I understand the rehabilitation point - but why can't he be locked up somewhere? Kate > This is not a question of morals anymore. It is a question of > survival. Kill the virus, or succumb to it. Haven't you seen 28 > Days Later? ;) > K If Harry abandons all sense of morality and kills someone in cold blood *anyone* then frankly I'd rather he *didn't* survive. if Harry has to kill Voldemort in a fight then fine, I have no problem with him doing so in self-defence (or defence of another for that matter). But if Harry has the option to capture/contain/or not kill Voldemort in some way and chooses to kill him anyway then really i don't care about him anymore. And Voldemort is not a virus he is a sentient being (I'll leave the issue as to how human he is open). No I haven't seen 28 days later btw. K From oneel at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 17:49:19 2003 From: oneel at yahoo.com (Tania Canedo) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 17:49:19 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: <132.27f1b096.2cf78b10@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85977 In book 5 Mark Evans is 10 years old, so if he IS a Wizard (or a would-be wizard) the Ministry does not have a record of him, I read in an interview with Rowling that there is a book with a magical Quill that writes the name of new wizards, and once a year (before the beggining of class) Prof. McGonalgal checks the book and sends owls to everyname that is writen there... So probably by Book 6 we will see Mark Evans not only as his neighbor but probably as his fellow student Tania From oneel at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 18:52:08 2003 From: oneel at yahoo.com (Tania Canedo) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 18:52:08 -0000 Subject: Does this means we can now be sure she won't kill off Harry dear? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85978 "J.K. Rowling: There are going to be seven Harrys all together. He will be 17 in the final book, which means he will have come of age in the Wizarding World. In Book 7, he will become a full wizard, and free to use his magic outside school. I am currently writing Book 4, and Book 3 will be out in July. " I found this in http://www.hogwarts-library.net/reference/interviews/19990319_BarnesNoble.html it's her first online interview in the US... I think this means that she won't kill him, by making the statment that he'll be able to use magic outside of Hogwarts, JK is possible asuring us that he'll be able to jinx the Dursley's after coming home again for that summer... isn't it?? or Am I just to desperate and don't want to read Harry's death??? (comments????) Tania From kerberusmon at yahoo.com.mx Thu Nov 27 19:09:07 2003 From: kerberusmon at yahoo.com.mx (Aoi Cerberusmon) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 19:09:07 -0000 Subject: Metamorphagi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85979 Yaira wrote: > Tonks tells Harry that metamorphagi are really rare > and they're born, not made. > Is it possible that Harry could be a metamorphagi and the seemingly > unimportant anecdote from Book 1 is really a huge clue? But for being a metamorphagi one of the parents should be too. Maybe that's why James was very good at transfiguration?? "Aoi Cerberusmon" From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Thu Nov 27 20:40:59 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 20:40:59 +0000 Subject: Ask the Question (meaning of the name Luna) Message-ID: <3FC6615B.4060802@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85980 Laura: > There must also be some meaning behind Luna's name, Luna meaning the moon. I haven't quite had enough time to ponder about that, but there is definitely a signifigance. Your thoughts???? <<< Angel adds: Connotations of the moon - something silvery. I'm wondering if this is part of Harry's Slytherin side coming out. The moon tends to change the landscape around it, bringing out the hollows of the landscape. The silvery glow is from the reflected light of the sun - without the sun, there is no moonlight. This is also the connotation of 'Lunatic' which she seems to play up to. From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Thu Nov 27 20:57:45 2003 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 20:57:45 -0000 Subject: TBAY: In the control room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85981 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote: > "Very good," says Pippin, but before she can continue, Oliver and > Abigail walk into the room. A small owl sits on the shoulder of > Abigail's many-pocketed overcoat. > > "There you are, Erin," says Abigail. "Right after you and Jenny > disappeared, this owl turned up with a letter addressed to you. I > figured this was where we'd find you. > > "And," says Oliver, clutching his BB GUN as he watches Pippin > closely, "We wanted to make certain you were all right." The PARTY > LINE badge on his otherwise unadorned black cloak chooses that moment > to gleam brightly.[snip] > > > > "Evil!Bill who kills Dumbledore, and-" Erin is amending, when > suddenly a flash of bright green light slices over her shoulder, > missing her by inches. Erin, Jenny and Abigail scream. > > A tall man in black with long red hair tied back behind him and an > upraised wand stands before them. "You have irked me far too often > this day. Spilling my secrets, trying pyschoanalyze me, and now > revealing my Ever So Evil plan to off Dumbledore. You must be > silenced! Avad- " > > "Quickly! Into the control room! It can only be accessed by > Portkey!" yells Pippin. The five of them race through the halls > until they reach the control room, where Sneaky the House-Elf is > already cowering. > > "We wizard-proofed this place a long time ago," explains Pippin, > gesturing at all the rows of buttons, levers, and > videoscreens. "There's no telling how much harm Stoned!Harry could do > if he were able to enter. Now, you two," she says, turning to Erin > and Oliver, "you do realize what you've done?" > > "It's Ever So Evil Bill," whispers Oliver miserably. "Our belief has > embodied him. Oh Erin, what are we going to do?" > > "Oh my God, I cannot believe it" utters a thunderstruck Olivier. "What ?" asks Erin, "don't tell me you're afraid of Evil!Bill now that we have created him. You knew all along this was going to happen." "No no, it's not that. Erin, do you realize that I am now stuck in a room with Pippin ? It is... it is a pleasure getting to know you" stutters Olivier. "I have never trusted stuttering people" says Pippin, advancing towards Olivier. "So, you are the one who has been giving away Support Lupin badges anywhere in the Bay ? Why, did you really think you could convince anyone ? I was there before the release of GoF, you know ? I have seen many ships cheered, many harbors cleared, and many newbie like you going as they've been stunned and are of sense forlorn." "I am not afraid of you" cries an appalled Olivier "Yes, you are" whispers Erin. "Shh, don't let her know !" whispers back Olivier before continuing with a falsely confident voice. "I'll stand by Lupin till cannon shoots us down. I am not weaponless." Olivier threw back his cloak. The Erin-made BB GUN glittered as he grasped it and its bright canon shone like a sudden flame as he swept it out. For a moment, it seemed to the eyes of Erin that a white flame flickered on Olivier's PARTY LINE badge. "Do you think that impresses me ?" Pippin smirks at the view of the weapon of her opponents. "I am from the lord of the rings too, so stealing quotes from it won't help you. What do you have to say in defense of your beloved Lupin anyway ?" "Well, I believe ESE!Lupin is wrong, deeply wrong, fundamentally wrong. You even admitted it way back in your 39362 post, Pippin" says Olivier. "The fact that it is sad does not mean it is not true" cuts Pippin "what do you think ? JKR is not writing a lullaby." "True, but until now she has shown great thematic consistency, she would not ruin the whole thematic impact of a book just for the pleasure of Lupin saying "bang! you're dead Dumbledore, I was evil right from the start". Now what is the main theme of PoA ?" Olivier asks "Some have argued it is overreaction" answers Abigail. "Just about every one seems to overreact in it : Aunt Marge overreacts to James, then Harry overreacts to her, Ron overreacts to the loss of Scabber, Hagrid to Buckbeack's case, Snape to Sirius, Sirius to Peter, Wood to Quidditch and so on. It is literally and symbolically a book where everyone seems to act like animals." "Yes that is true, but I think it is not the whole story. I think a most important theme is liberating oneself, breaking free" says Olivier. "You sure read the title" says Pippin, somewhat sarcastically. Ignoring the comment, Olivier goes on : "Of course, we have the main plot of Sirius breaking free from Azkaban, but also Harry leaving the Dursleys and experiencing freedom from the first time. ******** It took Harry several days to get used to his strange new freedom. PoA ch.4 ******** And for a moment at the end, he even thinks he is going away from then for good. Sirius himself escapes a second time, not to mention Buckbeack. Of course it is not all, most of the plot in PoA is devoted to Harry feeling imprisoned in Hogwarts while his friends are in Hogsmead and him finally sneaking out. And of course, Peter escapes. In the words of our dear Sybill ******** His servant has been chained these twelve years. Tonight, before midnight, the servant will break free. PoA ch.16 ******** So I think my point is well supported." "But where does Lupin play any role in this ?" asks Erin. "I think Lupin, and also James, Sirius and Peter, have a part in the liberation theme too. Let us come back to PoA ch.18. ******** My transformations in those days were - were terrible. It is very painful to turn into a werewolf. I was separated from humans to bite, so I bit and scratched myself instead. [...] My body was still wolfish, but my mind seemed to become less so whiled I was with them. [...] Soon we were leaving the Shrieking Shack and roaming the school grounds and the village by night." PoA ch.18 ********" I have always read this as Lupin's liberation : going out from the Shrieking Shack, where he was suffering agony, trapped in his own body, to roam the grounds freely, and very carelessly by the way, but freely. I have always found the image of a stag, a bear-like dog and a gigantic wolf running in the Forbidden Forest very picturesque. But can we say Lupin has achieved freedom with this ? In my opinion no, he was betraying the confidence of Dumbledore and putting his friends and the other students in an extremely dangerous situation. It is but justice that Lupin's transformation ruins everything at the end of PoA and that Lupin has to go away in the end..." "That is the only part where I would agree with you" remarks Pippin. "Let us now pay a look at what happened to the "breaking free plot". Sirius is forced to go in hiding again, and we now know that he was bound to spent the last years of his life entrapped again, on the worst possible place for him except for Azkaban. Harry is forced to go back to the Dursleys. Okay, he has a signed form from Sirius allowing him to go to Hogsmead, so in a sense, part of the freedom plot is resolved, but it is arguably the least significant. Peter has rejoined the Dark Lord, and even if it is hard to guess what fate awaits him, one can hardly say he is free. So Lupin only remains. Suppose for an instant he was ever so evil" says Olivier in a dramatic voice. "It's okay, Erin, it is just an hypothesis" he adds to a shivering Erin. "Let us suppose so. Then it would mean that all the breaking free plots were doomed from the start. And that I cannot accept, I am sure JKR would not have made this theme so pervading in PoA only to show its vanity in the forthcoming books. In fact, it was you that gave me the idea how it could be developped, Pippin. The only thing I have ever considered in ESE!Lupin is the fact that Lupin could be tempted to join Voldemort if he was convinced that Voldemort could free him from his illness. So unless JKR has chosen to doom the "breaking free theme" in PoA, it is necessary that Lupin free himself from his werewolf condition." "Wait" shouts Pippin, "that is nothing but meta-thinking. You suppose that breaking free is a theme in PoA and then you suppose that JKR would not contradict a previous theme. You have absolutely no canon to support any of your claims." "It is meta-thinking" concedes Olivier. "But you must admit that there are plenty of canon for the breaking free theme in PoA. And you yourself put for the idea that one of Lupin's driving force was to be freed from his illness. So that is acceptable. As for the idea that JKR will expand on a Free!Lupin, look at him in OoP : he is serene and very ready to discuss with his fellow werewolf. Besides, I have always thought meta- thinking was a sound way to proceed. I mean, JKR's world is not perfectly coherent, no matter how you look at it, some things will never make any sense. On the other hand, it is beautifully coherent on the symbolic level, so I would rather rely on my thematic intuition than on pure logical analysis to understand it. Anyway, Erin, do you want to adhere to FILK LOAD ?" "What does it mean ?" asks Erin. "Freed from Illness Lupin Kan Lead Order After Dumbledore's Demise !" answers an obviously overjoyed Olivier, "it gathers those who trust Lupin enough to envision him leading the Order should anything happen to Dumbledore. Yeah, I know, I know there is some misspelling and it should really be FFILK LOADD, but you get the idea. After all, I should speak like Fleur." Regards, Olivier PS : All my apologies to Pippin, Erin and Abigail if I distorted their views on this post, I could not resist the envy of dueling against Pippin in person. References : > > ESE!Bill parts 1 and 2: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85610 > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85729 > > ESE!Lupin: > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/39362 Some poetry from Coleridge and a few words from the Two Towers have also sneaked in this post. From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Thu Nov 27 20:44:48 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 20:44:48 +0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS - Chapter 6 - The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black Message-ID: <3FC66240.7060405@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85982 HunterGreen: Its exteremly curious that both Snape and Potter not in the tapestry. I can almost understand the Snape thing (for some reason I have this thought that his family is from a different WW 'circle', like out of country or something--that could even been the cause of some of his social problems), but its odd that the Potters aren't on there. Angel: I'm wondering if the Potters were an older family, and the Snapes weren't considered pure enough. Alternatively there is some possibility that the Potters were the scions of Welsh wizarding aristocracy. When Hagrid flew to Surrey I wonder if he followed the railway line, hence going over Bristol (aside from that being where JKR was born) which could be from Wales or the West Country I'm wondering if James or Sirius and Snape were half brothers, and the bloke from the pensive was Severus's Stepfather. Sirius would be my betting. Latin root S name, the mutual enmity, and the comment about Harry noticing the similarities and differences when they confronted each other. Angel From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Thu Nov 27 20:52:59 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 20:52:59 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chess Theory In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FC6642B.7010400@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85983 iris_ft wrote: > > Iris again: Er...forgive my ignorance, but I'm not a chess player. > What is a move of castling? Normally the king moves only one square at a time in any direction. In Castling, if it's the first time the king has been moved in the game, then the King can move two or three squares, and the castle is brought into the middle of the game, swapping places with the king. http://www.chessclub.com/rules/Castling.html has more details. "Angel" From kate_bag at hotmail.com Thu Nov 27 20:56:59 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 20:56:59 -0000 Subject: Does this means we can now be sure she won't kill off Harry dear? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85984 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tania Canedo" wrote: > "J.K. Rowling: > There are going to be seven Harrys all together. He will be 17 in > the final book, which means he will have come of age in the > Wizarding World. In Book 7, he will become a full wizard, and free > to use his magic outside school. I am currently writing Book 4, and > Book 3 will be out in July. " > > I found this in > http://www.hogwarts-library.net/reference/interviews/19990319_BarnesNoble.html > it's her first online interview in the US... I think this means that > she won't kill him, by making the statment that he'll be able to use > magic outside of Hogwarts, JK is possible asuring us that he'll be > able to jinx the Dursley's after coming home again for that summer... isn't > it?? or Am I just to desperate and don't want to read Harry's > death??? I don't think that this comment means she is not going to kill off Harry...I always assumed that in the summer of Book 7 Harry was going to be able to use magic, even when in Privet Drive with the Dursleys (assuming he is even going to stay with the Dursleys in the summer of Book 7). Fred and George used magic in Oop, the summer of their seventh year...so Harry won't have to "go back" and jinx the Dursleys, Harry being a full wizard is something we're going to get to see in the opening chapters of Book 7 (remember - his seventeenth birthday is going to occur that July). Cheers, ~Kate From gbannister10 at aol.com Thu Nov 27 22:21:47 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 22:21:47 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85985 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: Kneasy: > IMO Voldy has been deliberately set up as a non-human entity, as the > essence of evil, to enable him to be destroyed without qualms. > That is a morality nearly everyone can approve of. > Similarly, I like to think that there must be a loophole in the laws > governing the use of unforgivable curses to allow the good side to > meet the chief baddy and his band on something like equal terms. > Geoff: I think that there is an overlap between the real world and the Wizarding World at this point in that ethical (and human) considerations can be eroded and sidelined in the cause of furthering a victory, sometimes in the name of freedom. This point is additionally pointed up in HP where folk who are over- zealous have their ethical viewpoint distorted as a result of their own actions: "'Terror everywhere.... panic.... confusion... that's how it used to be. Well, things like that bring out the best in some people and the worst in others. Crouch's principles might've been good in the beginning - I wouldn't know. He rose quickly through the Ministry and he started ordering very harsh measures against Voldemort's supporters. The Aurors were given new powers - powers to kill rather than capture for instance. And I wasn't the only one who was handed straight to the Dementors without trial. Crouch fought violence with violence and authorised the use of the Unforgiveable Curses against suspects. I would say he became as ruthless and cruel as many on the Dark side.'" (Sirius to Harry, Ron & Hermione, GOF p.457 UK edition) "'I'll say this for Moody, though, he never killed if he could help it. Always brought people in alive where possible. He was tough but he never descended to the level of the Death Eaters.'" (ditto p.462) Here we see two sides of a morality. If you take up the enemy's methods and weapons, do you become the enemy? Perhaps this is a reminder of Cicero's saying "Inter arma silent leges" - freely translated, "in time of war, laws fall silent", potentially a chilling prospect. There have often been moral grey areas which fit that adage; one which comes to mind was the bombing of Dresden at the end of WW2. We have to ask ourselves, within the parameters of the Wizarding World which actually parallels ours very closely at this point, should Harry be modelling himself on Crouch or Moody? Geoff From tommy_m_riddle at yahoo.com Thu Nov 27 23:19:37 2003 From: tommy_m_riddle at yahoo.com (Sarah Riddle) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 15:19:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Chess Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031127231937.59098.qmail@web60502.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85986 Iris again: >Er...forgive my ignorance, but I'm not a chess player. What is a move of castling? >>> Me: I'm not either, so I googled: "\Cas"tle\, v. i. [imp. & p. p. {Castled}; p. pr. & vb. n. {Castling}.] (Chess) To move the castle to the square next to king, and then the king around the castle to the square next beyond it, for the purpose of covering the king." That doesn't bode well for Hermione at the end of Book 7... Sarah From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Thu Nov 27 21:07:09 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 21:07:09 +0000 Subject: Metamorphagi In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <3FC6677D.5080704@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 85987 Aoi Cerberusmon wrote: > Yaira wrote: > > Tonks tells Harry that metamorphagi are really rare > > and they're born, not made. > > Is it possible that Harry could be a metamorphagi and the seemingly > > unimportant anecdote from Book 1 is really a huge clue? Aoi: > But for being a metamorphagi one of the parents should be too. Maybe > that's why James was very good at transfiguration?? I think we might look more to Lily's prowess at charms. Or possibly they both carried recessive genes for it, and the combination of charms and transfiguration make H a metamorphmagus. After all, there have to be people that are the first in the families, otherwise it would have died out. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 00:12:22 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 00:12:22 -0000 Subject: Question on SS/PS Chapter 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85988 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" wrote: > Hello Everyone, > > My bleary eyes can take no more searching through old posts to see > if this has been brought up before, so I'm going to just ask you all. > > On p 122 of the US Paperback Edition of SS: > > "And now there were only three people left to be sorted." > > ***** > Dean Thomas and Lisa Turpin are sorted after this statement. Next > Ron becomes a Gryffindor. And *then* Blaise Zabini becomes a > Slytherin. > > If I'm not mistaken that's four, not three. > > Is this a Flint, or maybe it was meant to say there were three left > other than Ron to be sorted? Maybe no one matters to Harry after > Ron, so Blaise Zabini doesn't count? > > I know it's a minor point, but there it is, > > KathyK, who needs to stop staring at her computer screen now I've noticed it every time I've read that scene and can think of no reasonable explanation for it. IMHO, it's a flint that should have been caught and queried by the editor and/or proofreader. Carol From t.forch at mail.dk Fri Nov 28 00:16:46 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 01:16:46 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: References: <132.27f1b096.2cf78b10@aol.com> Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031128011328.0248e7b0@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 85989 At 17:49 27-11-03 +0000, you wrote: > In book 5 Mark Evans is 10 years old, so if he IS a Wizard (or a >would-be wizard) the Ministry does not have a record of him, I read >in an interview with Rowling that there is a book with a magical >Quill that writes the name of new wizards, and once a year (before >the beggining of class) Prof. McGonalgal checks the book and sends >owls to everyname that is writen there... Q: How can two Muggles have a kid with magical powers? Also how does the Ministry of Magic find out these kids have powers? A: It's the same as two black-haired people producing a redheaded child. Sometimes these things just happen, and no one really knows why! The Ministry of Magic doesn't find out which children are magic. In Hogwarts there's a magical quill which detects the birth of a magical child, and writes his or her name down in a large parchment book. Every year Professor McGonagall checks the book, and sends owls to the people who are turning 11. This service is brought to you by the Hogwarts Library Meta-FAQ ;-) (the last part is pure, shameless self-promotion) /Troels From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 00:15:26 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 00:15:26 -0000 Subject: Question on SS/PS Chapter 7 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85990 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" wrote: > > Hello Everyone, > > > > My bleary eyes can take no more searching through old posts to see > > if this has been brought up before, so I'm going to just ask you > all. > > > > On p 122 of the US Paperback Edition of SS: > > > > "And now there were only three people left to be sorted." > > > > ***** > > Dean Thomas and Lisa Turpin are sorted after this statement. Next > > Ron becomes a Gryffindor. And *then* Blaise Zabini becomes a > > Slytherin. > > > > If I'm not mistaken that's four, not three. > > > > Is this a Flint, or maybe it was meant to say there were three left > > other than Ron to be sorted? Maybe no one matters to Harry after > > Ron, so Blaise Zabini doesn't count? > > > > I know it's a minor point, but there it is, > > > > KathyK, who needs to stop staring at her computer screen now > > In the british edition Dean wasn't mentioned. That was changed for > the American. I think this was a Flint from the American editor, > because if you look closely, there weren't three people left after > Harry's sorting, but three people after Harry spoke with Percy. That > means Dean was sorted before Lisa Turpin, and wasn't mentioned (like > Crabbe and Goyle) > > Hickengruendler Maybe the American editor thought Dean should be mentioned and added his name, but forgot to change "three" to "four"? Still, someone should have caught it--JKR herself in page proofs if no one else. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 00:37:12 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 00:37:12 -0000 Subject: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85991 > >Laura, wondering who Snape would have gone after first if he had > >been in the MoM that night-Sirius or Bellatrix?< Snape told Sirius to stay at Grimmauld Place so he wouldn't be in the battle. As a Member of the Order, he placed duty before a personal antagonism, and IMHO he would have done the same thing in the MoM (where he couldn't go without blowing his cover). To do otherwise would be to betray Dumbledore's trust and risk losing not only his place in the Order but his position at Hogwarts, which would put him at the nonexistent mercy of Voldemort, who wants him dead. I'm not sure whether Snape has any personal grudge against Bellatrix. She'd probably be a former friend/protector like Lucius (one of the gang of older Slytherins Severus ran with till they graduated and left him behind), but knowing what she has since become (the torture of the Longbottoms, etc.), he would probably want nothing to do with her. But (setting aside the ESE!Lupin theory), the members of the Order don't kill or use the unforgiveable curses, which would make them as bad as their enemies. So if he "went after" Bellatrix, it would be with a defensive spell ("Stupefy" or a DADA spell we haven't learned yet). Who better than Snape to put out Bellatrix's fire without killing her? And what reason would he have to "go after" Sirius with a defensive spell? Carol, who wishes that Snape and Sirius had been able to fight on the same side before Sirius died but understands why it could not have happened From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 00:48:14 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 00:48:14 -0000 Subject: The Shrieking Shack-did Snape have ulterior motives? In-Reply-To: <1069521487.9035.6.camel@Bujold_RH> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85992 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Angel Moules wrote: > On Sat, 2003-11-22 at 17:52, jwcpgh wrote: > > So I was thinking about Tonks's wonderful defense of Lupin posts, > and a thought occurred to me. (Paramedics weren't necessary but it > was a near thing.) The night of the Shrieking Shack incident in > PoA, Snape, as we know, appears in the Shack. He tells the group > that he found out what was happening when he went into Remus's > office to give him his monthly wolfsbane potion and saw the > Marauder's Map. (PoA p.358 US). As soon as he grasps the situation, > he goes tearing off to the Shack. But wait a minute-what about the > potion? Why didn't Snape bring it with him? > > Angel adds: > > I'm sure that the potion has to be drunk before it stops smoking. It's > earlier in the story. We don't know what makes it stop smoking, but it > might have become ineffectual by the time that it gets to the shack. > > I'm guessing that he saw the non-smoking goblet, and panicked. (need to > re-read PoA) > > AotN Not to mention that Snape would have had to run out of Lupin's office with the smoking goblet in his hands and keep it from spilling as he ran. But he must have set it down to read the map and the thought that the "murderer" was in the Shack put the potion out of his mind. He also probably thought that Lupin was a traitor trying to help Black get into Hogwarts. There was no possible way for him to know their real motives or the real situation. Carol, who also needs to reread that scene From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 01:50:32 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 01:50:32 -0000 Subject: Identifying the Put-Outer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85993 > Oryomai asked: > > OoP, Chapter Three: page 58 (American): > > "Got it," he muttered, raising what looked like a silver cigarette > lighter into the air and clicking it. > > > "Borrowed it from Dumbledore," growled Moody, pocketing the Put-Outer. > > > > > > My question is this: how did Harry know it was the Put-Outer? We > usually learn about things like that from Harry's POV and nowhere in > that area did anyone mention the Put-Outers name. Are we just > supposed to assume Harry just *knew* the name? > > I don't think it necessarily implies that he does know the name. If > he did, I think it would say, "raising a Put-Outer into the air and > clicking it". Instead Rowling used the description, which implies > Harry had never seen or heard of this device before. The word > Put-Outer is used in a fairly neutral area, so it could a description > from the perspective of the omnicient narrator (who is present, > despite the fact that she usually limits her decriptions to Harry's > perpective) rather than Harry's. > > -Corinth Carol: Right, except that JKR seldom uses a fully omniscient point of view (the first chapter of SS/PS is the most notable exception). Usually she uses a limited omnisicient point of view: The narrator can get into Harry's mind but no one else's (except in the startling first chapter of GoF, which violates our expectations on a number of levels, but I don't want to talk about that now). In the passage Oryomai quoted, "what looked like a silver cigarette lighter" reflects Harry's (still somewhat muggle-oriented) point of view, but "Put-Outer" is information provided by the narrator to the reader, who presumably has read the first book and is familiar with the term. However, I agree that there's something odd about the passage. First, as I've already mentioned, the slip into fully omniscient mode is conspicuous because it happens so rarely and usually with much better cause. Second, Moody's cumpulsion to explain to Harry that he borrowed the Put-Outer from Dumbledore without telling him what it is seems unmotivated. Why do it? The explanation implies that Harry already know what the Put-Outer is and that it belongs to Dumbledore--as if Moody is forgetting that Harry was fifteen months old when Dumbledore put out the lights on Privet Drive and can't possibly have any recollection of the incident (even if he'd been awake). But then Moody also seems to think that Harry will enjoy looking at photos of the Order members just before they died or met some other terrible fate. Both incidents may reflect a kind of obtuseness in Moody, the imaginative inability to see from another person's perspective. Alternatively, the "borrowed it from Dumbledore" line may just be a rather clumsy way of presenting information to the reader without having Harry ask Moody what the object is, a tactic that might have needlessly slowed the pace of the narrative (and deprived us of a chance for overanalysis). Or--irony of ironies, given that Moody has recently spent nine months in his own trunk while an imposter taught his classes--maybe ESE!Moody stole the Put-Outer from Dumbledore. Or the line could be a red herring to make us suspect that he's not telling the truth. . . . Carol, who thinks it's really just a small blunder that JKR didn't consider worthy of revision From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 03:10:06 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 03:10:06 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85994 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Katrina" wrote: > Amura wrote: > I was thinking Sirius might hide in Bermuda :P > > Then Katrina added: > Couldn't have been Bermuda. . . What about Australia? They have > some big, flashy birds there, too. > > Angel considers: > What about Madagascar - It's a haven for exotic plants and wildlife. > A lot of the botanic gardens in the UK, particularly Kew, have a > Madagascar appeal going, because so much of the Flora and Fauna are > novel, and used in native medicine. (I add the botanic gardens bit, > because JKR is known to frequent them.) > > Now Katrina wonders: > What if, instead of being somewhere exotic, he was hiding in one of > the botanical gardens? What if he was in Kew, for example? > Certainly easier to get back to Hogwarts when he was needed. Carol: Didn't he have Buckbeak with him? I think Bucky would have been a bit hard to hide in a botanical garden. And Buckbeak would have provided the necessary transportation from Madagascar (or wherever) back to Britain. Also IIRC, Hedwig's messages took quite a while to deliver, indicating that Sirius was far qway (not, however, anywhere near Tibet, which was Kingsley Shacklebolt's red herring). Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 03:27:28 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 03:27:28 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's "lordship"/anagrams (Was Dumbledore, Organ Grinder ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85995 -> Berit: > > I think you're right Carol! Dumbledore referring to Tom as Lord > > Voldemort is simply a recognition of a title. But, could it be that > > the title is not just self-created? Maybe Voldemort can rightly > call > > himself a lord? If he really is the Heir of Slytherin, which it > seems > > he is (Dumbledore confirms it), then the lord-title might be > > justified, not just self-created. > > Geoff: > Well, yes..... but the name "Lord Voldemort" was created from an > anagram. If he can claim the title of Lord - which I seriously doubt - > then he could have called himself Lord Slytherin, Lord Hogwarts or > Lord Tom Noddy or something. > > Geoff Also, as far as we know, Salazar Slytherin was not a lord. In fact, unless I'm forgetting someone, the only titled wizard in the series so far is another dead one, the Bloody Baron. And possibly Sir Cadogan, but he's only a knight. I'm pretty sure Voldemort's title is simply an invention, a way to establish his own superiority, distance himself from his wealthy but nonaristocratic muggle father, and deny his "tainted" blood. And of course, the anagrams that could be created from Tom Marvolo Riddle were probably somewhat limited. Speaking of anagrams, how did anyone come up with Perseus Evans for Severus Snape? Did someone just sit down and try to discover all the possibilities using pencil and paper or did that person use a computerized anagram generator? Was it before or after Lily's maiden name was revealed as Evans? And has anyone made a similar attempt for other characters? Carol From meriaugust at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 03:32:23 2003 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 03:32:23 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lucius Malfoy Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85996 Hi everyone. Tried searching through the archives to see if anything along this line of reasoning came up and saw none so I thought I'd throw this out for discussion. I was thinking about Professor Snape today and I was wondering how he got introduced to the Death Eaters. I know that we have very little cannon about his family childhood (aside from the two pensieve scenes there have been no other mentions of Snape relatives or childhood experiences) so I wonder if his father was a Death Eater and introduced his son to the fold. (Which also brings up another point: maybe Snape leaving the DE's had to do with getting back at his father, who, from what little we've seen must have been an abusive personality. But that's another post.) Then I started thinking that perhaps he and Lucius Malfoy may have had a friendship of sorts while they were at Hogwarts. If Malfoy was 41 in OotP and Snape was around 38 then they would have been a few years apart and since they were both in Slytherin it is possible that Snape looked up to the older Malfoy. Could Malfoy (as pure a family as there ever was) have introduced the perhaps impressionable Snape to LV? Hero worship perhaps? Just a thought. Any ideas? Meri From sunnylove0 at aol.com Fri Nov 28 03:40:04 2003 From: sunnylove0 at aol.com (sunnylove0 at aol.com) Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2003 22:40:04 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS - Chapter 6 - The Noble and Most ... Message-ID: <5b.425be31b.2cf81d94@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 85997 In a message dated 11/27/2003 2:56:59 AM Mountain Standard Time, patientx3 at aol.com writes: > HunterGreen: > Its exteremly curious that both Snape and Potter not in the tapestry. > I can almost understand the Snape thing (for some reason I have this > thought that his family is from a different WW 'circle', like out of > country or something--that could even been the cause of some of his > social problems), but its odd that the Potters aren't on there. > I can't see Sirius either not mentioning it or never noticing (he > probably looking *specifically* for a Potter relative at some point > as a teenager, I know I would if there was a chance I was [albeit > distantly] related to my best friend). If there was one I don't see > why he wouldn't make a point of mentioning it to Harry....unless > there's some reason for him NOT to. > > > Actually, it might make sense for two reasons: A) James's parents took Sirius in (remember Uncle Alphard being blasted off for leaving him some gold) B) Sirius talks like he was happy being there, which means if the Potters were purebloods, which is semi-confirmed by Bellatrix's description of Harry as a halfblood, they are probably what Mama Black would describe as blood traitors (like the Weasleys, not obsessed with racial purity) and they wouldn't be on the tapestry anyway. Amber [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 03:41:56 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 03:41:56 -0000 Subject: Neville's name (was: Neville's Gran) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85998 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "iris_ft" wrote: > > > By the way, could someone tell me what "Neville" means? (sorry for > > being so lazy, but actually I don't have enough free time to check > > the archives) Where does this name come from, and how do you > > pronounce it in english? > > Neville rhymes with Devil. I looked it up in > http://www.behindthename.com for you: > > << From a surname which was originally derived from a place name > meaning "new town" in Norman French. >> Don't kow whether this is relevant, but the Nevilles were a very rich and powerful family in northern England in the fifteenth century. Richard Neville, the Earl of Warwick, was called the Kingmaker for his role in helping his Yorkist cousin Edward IV defeat the Lancastrian Henry VI. (I'm oversimplifying, but any more details would take me too far off topic.) Carol From jdr0918 at hotmail.com Fri Nov 28 03:42:23 2003 From: jdr0918 at hotmail.com (jdr0918) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 03:42:23 -0000 Subject: Sirius in Tibet? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 85999 <<>> The Sergeant Majorette says When I read that bit, I just naturally assumed he was in Haiti. The Caribbean is a magical area (Bermuda Triangle and all), and Haiti has a kind of outlaw magicality --you know, the kind of place where they don't ask questions if you pay in cash. Illusionist David Blaine found that people in Haiti were not amazed or entertained by his most startling trick, levitation ("They know their grandmothers can fly"). They were just suspicious, like "who are *you* working for?" --JDR From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 04:12:04 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 04:12:04 -0000 Subject: Snape's Fury In-Reply-To: <134.2852ba96.2cf34c31@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86000 Eloise asked: > > But how come Snape didn't suss Crouch!Moody? Was he really so intimidated by > Moody's apparent suspicion of him that he was unable to divine his true > nature? > Legilmency only works if you're looking the other person in the eye. Difficult to do when one of those eyes is magical and looking off in some other direction. Also, the real Mad eye Moody had a grudge against Snape as a former Death Eater; Crouch actually hated them. Snape could well have sensed that hatred and accepted without question that Crouch was Moody. Who could or would have suspected the real situation? And again, if Snape had gotten past his own dislike of the supposed Moody, how was he supposed to confront him eye to eye to attempt to read his thoughts? Another thought; he knew that someone had placed Harry's name in the Goblet of Fire and that that person was an enemy, but he may have suspected someone else; Karkaroff or Barty Crouch Sr. And Crouch's polyjuice plan, complete with his own flask to drink from, was well-planned and well-sustained. He knew the Dark Arts and he was an effective, if cold-heaarted, teacher (Draco as ferret, torturing the spiders). If he had botched the teaching job, Snape would have suspected him, but the disguise was too complete. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 05:23:42 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 05:23:42 -0000 Subject: Narcissa Malfoy (the real Spy) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86001 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "zihav" wrote: > Tom wrote: > >> I think the point I was trying to make that Narcissa is in a much > better position to be the spy for the Order and not Snape. We do > know Snape is getting information, but from who and how? Narcissa is > the who I believe and I just wanted to establish motive>> > > Carol replied: > > Tom, as I mentioned in another post, Narcissa is not trustworthy. > She's the one Kreacher went to when Sirius (unthinkingly) ordered > him to get out and she passed on Kreacher's information to Lucius, > who passed it to Voldemort. So she's connected to the plan to lure > Harry > to the MoM thinking that Sirius is in danger. Not a person likely to > give information to Snape. If he blows his cover to her (which I > don't think for a moment he would do), he's in big trouble.> > > Hi Carol, I agree there is a hole in my theory where Kreacher is > concerned, but we don't know *who* else was in the house when > Kreacher arrived. It could have been the entire lot of DE's that > escaped from Azkaban prison. Narcissa knows that Harry is at Hogwarts > and probably believed he would be protected there and how was he > going to leave the school without someone in the Order knowing, she > couldn't have seen all the events at the time and simply would have > reported again that Voldemort was trying to trick Harry to go to the > MoM. Remember she has to keep her cover or else she'll be cursed. We > just need a bit more information of who and what was in the house > when Kreacher arrived. If this is wrong then is there another > character that Snape could go to who would have information on the > DE's and Voldemort? > > Tom I think his contact is his old friend Lucius, who gets favorable reports about him from Draco. All Snape would have to do is pretend that he has to stay at Hogwarts to avoid arousing dumbledore's suspicions and that's the reason he wasn't at the graveyard. Voldemort probably knows otherwise, having been inside Quirrell's head, but I doubt that he shares what he knows with anyone, including his "slippery friend," Lucius. There may be some other explanation, but it's the only one I can come up with at the moment. Probably neither fully trusts the other, but I doubt that Lucius suspects Severus of allying himself with Sirius and the Weasleys against his old school friends. Carol From snapesmate at hotmail.com Fri Nov 28 06:01:48 2003 From: snapesmate at hotmail.com (snapesmate) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 06:01:48 -0000 Subject: 'Nymphadora Tonks'Anagrams Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86002 Rearranging the letters of 'Nymphadora Tonks' gives: "O Man! Python's dark." "Darn! Python's amok." "Snaky pond to harm." "Oh My! A pranks don't." "Snaky, mad, top horn." "O My! Parks on hadn't." "Prank shot dynamo." "Thank spy and room." "Rank, mad spy on hot." "Thorn and amok spy." "OK sad nymph on rat." "OK nympho 'n' sad rat." "Oh Man! Drank to spy." "Pranks 'n' moody hat." "Ha! Don't snaky romp." "Amok spy torn hand." "Mason dark python." Snapesmate "Am dark python son." From snapesmate at hotmail.com Fri Nov 28 06:05:31 2003 From: snapesmate at hotmail.com (snapesmate) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 06:05:31 -0000 Subject: 'Ollivander' Anagrams Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86003 Anagrams for Ollivander "Lad nor evil." "No rivalled." "No viler lad." "Liar 'n' loved." "Veil old ran." "Olden rival." "Veil nor lad." "Do ill raven." "Alvine lord." "Veil 'n' a lord." "Veil Ronald." "Veil Arnold." "Veil Roland." "Rev lion lad." "Red lav lion." "Old evil. A RN." "A live, old RN." "Vlei Ronald." "Load veil RN." Snapesmate From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 06:06:07 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 06:06:07 -0000 Subject: "Either must die at the hand of the other " (was "messy post") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86004 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Matt" wrote: > --- Carol wrote, in response to Iris: > > The Prophecy does *not* say that neither Harry nor > > Voldemort can defeat the other without dying .... > > What the Prophecy actually says is "either must > > die at the hand of the other for neither can live > > while the other survives" (OoP Am. ed. 841). > > > > In other words, one will have to die at the hand > > of the other, not both will kill the other. > > Just writing to point out something that I'm sure > has been said on list at some point, although I > don't recall seeing it. > > While the prophecy does not unambiguously say that > Harry must die in killing Voldemort, it is at least > open to that reading. The use of "either" in the > prophecy is ambiguous. While the word is more > commonly (and colloquially) used in a disjunctive > sense -- referring to one or the other of a pair -- > it is also used (in poetry, for instance) in a > conjunctive sense, referring to both members of the > pair. A common example of the second usage is the > phrase "on either side," which typically means "on > both sides." > > It appears that Harry and Dumbledore are interpreting the prophecy in > the disjunctive sense, as Carol does, to mean that either Harry or > Voldemort will die in their final confrontation. This explains > Dumbledore's concern (assuming you credit it) with protecting Harry > while he is most vulnerable, so that he will be as well-prepared as > possible at the moment of truth. > > An alternate reading is that rather than describing two possibilities, > the prophecy describes one certainty: *each* will die at the hand of > the other. That reading also suggests the possibility of a more > metaphorical reading of "die" -- Marj Garber fans, get your minds out > of the gutter -- in which there could perhaps be some compromise of > the absolutes that Harry and Voldemort represent. > > -- Matt What about "neither can live while the other survives," in which "neither" is clearly opposed to a singular "other"? That clearly suggests that only one will "live." (I proposed a reading of that line in another post in which I attempted to distinguish between "living" (which neither is apparently doing now) and "surviving" (which both are apparently doing). In any case, the suggestion seems to be that only one will live, just as the "either/other" line suggests that only one will die. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 06:10:04 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 06:10:04 -0000 Subject: Neville's broken nose In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86005 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "erinellii" wrote: > > > Sylvia wrote: > > > Neville's broken nose had the effect of making him mis-pronounce > his words, the spell coming out as "Stubefy!" It was thus > ineffective. If a wizard had a natural speech defect, a lisp, for > example, or an inability to pronounce the letter "r", would this also > affect his ability to cast spells? > > > > Angel added: > > There's two interesting points to add to this. The first is in > > Flitwick's first lesson, where he cautions that students should > > pronounce things properly, citing a wizard that didn't. The second > is the spell that Dolohov uses on Hermione, wordlessly. These two > instances seem to be slightly contradictory. > > Any ideas? > > > Erin: > No ideas, just another question: What about foriegn wizards with > accents like Fleur and Victor Krum? Surely they pronounce spells > differently from the English wizards? > > Erin Maybe that's why most of the spells are in Latin (or something like it) so that accents don't matter? Or zeir vands understand zeir speech because zey are French, too? (Trying to sound like Fleur without the book open--hope I'm not too far off and haven't offended anybody.) Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 06:19:35 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 06:19:35 -0000 Subject: Neville's broken nose In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86006 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dj_bagshaw" wrote: > > > Angel adds: > > There's two interesting points to add to this. The first is in > > Flitwick's first lesson, where he cautions that students should > > pronounce things properly, citing a wizard that didn't. The second > is > > the spell that Dolohov uses on Hermione, wordlessly. These two > instances > > seem to be slightly contradictory. > > Any ideas? > > > > > I believe the stronger and more trained the wizard, the less the > incantations are needed. Take Dumbledore, for example...if I'm not > mistaken, there are not many occasions that we see Dumbledore perform > magic *with* incantations; he usually performs his magic soundlessly > (a good example is his "excape" from the aurors in OoP - just a bunch > of cracks are heard, no spellcasting). In this same scene, Kingsley > also simply *whispers* the incantation to modify Marietta's memory, > and to my mind, a whisper is a very indecipherable thing where > syllabic emphasis is concerned. There are many, many more examples > of magic without incantations being performed, through all of the > novels (note, however, that a wand is *always* present, incantation > or none). > > I really don't know if any of this makes sense to you...I am still > unsure of most of it. But I do think that the difficulty of the > spell might also have something to do with it...if I recall > correctly, Harry says that had the Death Eater been able to say the > incantation to the spell with which Hermione is hit at the end of > OoP, it would have caused much more damage. > > ~Kate Since the wand chooses the wizard, a skilled wizard using his or her own wand probably needs only to will the spell to make it happen. Snape wordlessly cleaning the spilled boil potion is another example that comes immediately to my mind. Carol From chelly404 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 04:47:32 2003 From: chelly404 at yahoo.com (Chelly) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 04:47:32 -0000 Subject: Petunia's Family Loyalty Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86007 Just got done reading the OOP. Couldn't put it down. A few questions regarding Petunia. It hasn't been explained (or I didn't read that closely) why Petunia kept Harry all those years? Even after Harry and Dudley had those mishaps with the snake and Dudley growing a pig's tail. What exactly is her loyalty to Harry? Did Petunia ever meet Dumbledore, Voldemort or see the Dementors? She knows about Azakaban through Lily (OOP) but what else does she know? Does anyone think she has even a slight bond or likes Harry? I am asking becuase of the Howler that Dumbledore sent to her. It just seems unlikely to me that fear of the wizarding world could be the driving force to her logic. Will Petunia realize her strength on how it pertains to Harry's survival? By the way, great posts. I could read them all night too. Chelly From purpleangelstar7 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 05:37:00 2003 From: purpleangelstar7 at yahoo.com (Brittany) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 05:37:00 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS - Chapter 6 - The Noble and Most ... In-Reply-To: <5b.425be31b.2cf81d94@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86008 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, sunnylove0 at a... wrote: Actually, it might make sense for two reasons: > > A) James's parents took Sirius in (remember Uncle Alphard being blasted off > for leaving him some gold) > > B) Sirius talks like he was happy being there, which means if the Potters > were purebloods, which is semi-confirmed by Bellatrix's description of Harry as a > halfblood, they are probably what Mama Black would describe as blood > traitors (like the Weasleys, not obsessed with racial purity) and they wouldn't be on > the tapestry anyway. > > Amber > Wow, it's been such a long time since I've posted. Most of the new people here probably haven't seen any of my posts. Oh well, here are my 2 cents anyway... I thought that James' family was like the Weasleys', in that his family was excluded from the "dark side" of the Wizarding World's history or written records (especially since if the family is an old one) because they became blood traitors. Well James became a blood traitor when he married Lily, and whoever agreed with his decision kept the Potter family name, yet whoever thought that it was a bad decision married out of the family or changed their name to a more "suitable" family/person/anagram. BlueMoonNanaria From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 07:41:23 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 07:41:23 -0000 Subject: Can a Locked Door Stop an Elf? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86009 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kiricat2001" wrote: > In reading the Chapter Six summary, it is mentioned that Ron locks > the door of the bedroom he shares with Harry because he doesn't want > Kreacher to be able to wander in in the middle of the night. > > Why would a locked door stop Kreacher, if he really wanted to get in? > > ...edited... > > Yet, Ron thinks locking the door will keep Kreacher out. Is Ron > merely exhibiting ignorance of elf powers? Is Kreacher only able to > enter rooms by walking into them? ...edited... > > Marianne bboy_mn: I don't think it is a question of whether Kretcher can get through a locked door, the greater question is, as a servant of the House, would Kretcher /respect/ a locked door. My opinion is that he would. He would take a locked door as a specific order to stay out. Of course, that's just an opinion. bboy_mn From astrid at netspace.net.au Fri Nov 28 07:57:27 2003 From: astrid at netspace.net.au (Astrid Wootton) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 18:57:27 +1100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bang! You're Dead. (was: Voldemort's animus...) In-Reply-To: <001201c3b554$02c60cc0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86010 : > Large snips > > Kathryn > > < You say that Voldemort has > done things to Harry in the past which make it justified for Harry to kill > him. I say that that is vigilanteism. No individual has the right to decide > to cold bloodedly kill someone just because, in their opinion, they deserve > it. I refuse to believe that after the moral lessons and such that we have > seen in the books (our choices are what define us, discriminating against > other 'racial groups' is wrong etc) the finale is going to say that killing > someone is OK if you're a hero normally and anyway he was a really bad >> >person. > snip > > Kate >> > It's not like Voldemort can just be locked up or anything. He can't >> > be put into jail and rehabilitated. He's not just going to decide >> > one day that he doesn't want to try to rule the wizarding world >> > anymore. It's just not going to happen. > > snip >> > > Kathryn > >> >If Harry abandons all sense of morality and kills someone in cold blood > *anyone* then frankly I'd rather he *didn't* survive. if Harry has to kill > Voldemort in a fight then fine, I have no problem with him doing so in > self-defence (or defence of another for that matter). But if Harry has the > option to capture/contain/or not kill Voldemort in some way and chooses to > kill him anyway then really i don't care about him anymore. And Voldemort is > not a virus he is a sentient being (I'll leave the issue as to how human he > is open). No I haven't seen 28 days later btw. > > Astrid says > > Over numerous posts about Harry?s moral obligations, my mind has been drawn to > Hamlet?s dilemma. ?Now I might do it pat while he is praying.? But if he does, > Claudius? soul will go to heaven. That?s a kindness he doesn?t deserve. So he > postpones the moment of truth, and Polonius, Ophelia, Gertrude, Laertes, > Claudius and Hamlet all die as a result of that decision. > > By and large we in the audience all wish he?d just get on with it and bring > his father?s vengeance down sooner rather than later. We may agonise with > Hamlet ?O curs?d spite/ That ever I was born to set it right!? > > But we accept the moral imperative, and just wish he?d get on with it ! > > Is it because it was written 400 years ago that we accept this world view > without the squeamishness we feel for Harry? (And Voldemort beats Claudius any > day when it comes to the point. Claudius *only* killed father Hamlet ? that we > know of, anyway. > > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > > b/S=1707544108:HM/EXP=1070042594/A=1524963/R=0/*http://hits.411web.com/cgi-bin > /autoredir?camp=556&lineid=3614674&prop=egroupweb&pos=HM> > > ________HPFGU______Hexquarters______Announcement_______________ > > Before posting to any list, you MUST read the group's Admin File! > http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/admin > > Please use accurate subject headings and snip unnecessary material from posts > to which you're replying! > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service > . [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From belijako at online.no Fri Nov 28 09:05:42 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 09:05:42 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86011 Geoff wrote: > I think that there is an overlap between the real world and the > Wizarding World at this point in that ethical (and human) > considerations can be eroded and sidelined in the cause of furthering > a victory, sometimes in the name of freedom. > > This point is additionally pointed up in HP where folk who are over- > zealous have their ethical viewpoint distorted as a result of their > own actions: > > "'Terror everywhere.... panic.... confusion... that's how it used to > be. Well, things like that bring out the best in some people and the > worst in others. Crouch's principles might've been good in the > beginning - I wouldn't know. He rose quickly through the Ministry and > he started ordering very harsh measures against Voldemort's > supporters. The Aurors were given new powers - powers to kill rather > than capture for instance. And I wasn't the only one who was handed > straight to the Dementors without trial. Crouch fought violence with > violence and authorised the use of the Unforgiveable Curses against > suspects. I would say he became as ruthless and cruel as many on the > Dark side.'" (Sirius to Harry, Ron & Hermione, GOF p.457 UK edition) > > "'I'll say this for Moody, though, he never killed if he could help > it. Always brought people in alive where possible. He was tough but > he never descended to the level of the Death Eaters.'" (ditto p.462) > > Here we see two sides of a morality. If you take up the enemy's > methods and weapons, do you become the enemy? Perhaps this is a > reminder of Cicero's saying "Inter arma silent leges" - freely > translated, "in time of war, laws fall silent", potentially a > chilling prospect. There have often been moral grey areas which fit > that adage; one which comes to mind was the bombing of Dresden at the > end of WW2. > > We have to ask ourselves, within the parameters of the Wizarding > World which actually parallels ours very closely at this point, > should Harry be modelling himself on Crouch or Moody? Me: Thank you EVER so much for this reply Geoff! Excellent quote from the HP books, illustrating that these thoughts are indeed canon, not just wishful thinking from the soft-hearted reader :-) In passages like this Rowling makes it quite clear that it IS important what means the hero decides to use to defeat his opponent... Berit From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Fri Nov 28 12:07:47 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 12:07:47 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86012 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mightymaus75" > > Actually that was me applying fictional ethical principles to the > real world. I would never dare to impose my real world views on JKR > to tell her what she can and cannot write. While you may not feel > that the original comment was really applicable to you, personally I > feel rather strong about the Centaur and Goblin rights to life being > trampled here. > Somehow this thread seems to be developing into the equivalent of castigating Green activists because they're not doing enough for Kermit the Frog. Erm, you do realise that they're not real, don't you? That nobody has suggested killing Centaurs or Goblins in the time-line of the books anyway? That "A right to life" is just a slogan, a shorthand phrase generally used when disagreeing with governmental or judicial edicts? That everyone can shout it as loud and long as they like, but that death, in whatever form, be it accidental or intentional, will take absolutely no notice whatsoever? However, since you seem to be fixed in your views, let me pose you some moral questions within the terms of reference that you have set. The Goblins appear to be quite unperturbed about inflicting a slow and painful death upon burglars. Indeed, they seem to relish the thought. Defend this please, particularly with regards to a right to life. Centaurs have clearly expressed a willingness to kill for the heinous crime of trespass. Defend this please, particularly with regards to a right to life. Centaurs attack, with murderous intent, one of their own for *associating* with human wizards. Defend, as above, and also explain why such speciesist intolerance, which, if practiced by wizards, I'm sure you would condemn is, in the books, considered to be an understandable, though unfortunate, attitude. I'll be interested to read your answers, perhaps you may even come round to my view that the moralities of the Potterverse are necessarily different. Kneasy From patientx3 at aol.com Fri Nov 28 14:01:25 2003 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 14:01:25 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: <001201c3b554$02c60cc0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86013 K wrote: >>...killing someone in a war *when they are fighting back* is justified. Not just killing them if they are unarmed and not resisting. I said that killing Voldemort in a fight was fine but killing him in cold blood when he wasn't doing anything wasn't. << HunterGreen: But Voldemort being 'unarmed and not resisting' and 'not doing anything' are two very different things (IMO, I can't really imagine a situation where Voldemort wouldn't be resisting). Unless Voldemort is unarmed / caged or unconscience, there really is not a time when he's not a threat to Harry. Even if Harry attacked him when his back is turned, what is he going to do the moment he turns around and sees Harry? I can understand your point, and it is definitely applicable in situations like the one with Sirius, Lupin & Peter-although Peter had done horrible things (at least to Sirius), it would have been very wrong to kill an unarmed man, especially since he was begging for his life. Voldemort is a *constant* threat to Harry, no matter if he's actively trying to kill Harry at that moment or not (as for other people in the WW going up and killing Voldemort, now that's a different matter-your argument definitely works there). K wrote: >>I think it far more likely that Harry will try and sacrifice himself in some way to somehow 'save' Voldemort.<< HunterGreen: Although I doubt there is any way to 'save' VD, I agree that Harry won't just go out and kill him. There's been all this back-and-forth about whether Harry would be justified or morally right in killing VD, when it isn't that way to Harry. He *doesn't* want to be the one who kills Voldemort. No matter how many things VD has done to him (which is quite a bit more than just killing his parents, nearly *everything* bad in his life can be traced back to Voldemort), he is horrified by the thought, and I doubt will ever 'embrace it' in any way. That's exactly why he saved Peter, and why he tried crucio on Bellatrix as opposed to AK, he doesn't want to end anyone's life. Kate wrote: > > It's not like Voldemort can just be locked up or anything. He can't > > be put into jail and rehabilitated. He's not just going to decide > > one day that he doesn't want to try to rule the wizarding world > > anymore. It's just not going to happen. K replied: >> I understand the rehabilitation point - but why can't he be locked up somewhere?<< HunterGreen: Eventually he would get out. He has powers that are supposed to be matched only by DD, and by what we've seen of DD, he can be *very powerful* when he wants. I understand that Voldemort would be without his wand, but he's also very charming, and manipulative, and of course there's all that 'dark magic' that everyone thought Sirius used to get out (of course Sirius didn't use it, but that doesn't mean that it doens't exist). Of course the MoM would probably just have his soul sucked out, if the dementers were still available (which would be worse than anything Harry does to him), or have him put to death some other way, but I very much doubt that he wouldn't find some way to escape (or that one of his followers wouldn't break him out). K: >>If Harry abandons all sense of morality and kills someone in cold blood *anyone* then frankly I'd rather he *didn't* survive. << HunterGreen: IMHO if Harry did that it would be such a break from his character that the journey to get him to that point would have killed most of him anyway, I doubt he'd be able to ride into the sunset after that. -HunterGreen. From delwynmarch at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 15:27:13 2003 From: delwynmarch at yahoo.com (Doriane) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 15:27:13 -0000 Subject: Identifying the Put-Outer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86014 > > Oryomai asked: > > OoP, Chapter Three: page 58 (American): > > "Got it," he muttered, raising what looked like a silver > > cigarette lighter into the air and clicking it. > > > > "Borrowed it from Dumbledore," growled Moody, pocketing the Put- > > Outer. > > > > My question is this: how did Harry know it was the Put-Outer? > Carol: > > Second, Moody's cumpulsion to explain to Harry that he borrowed the > Put-Outer from Dumbledore without telling him what it is seems > unmotivated. Why do it? The explanation implies that Harry already > know what the Put-Outer is and that it belongs to Dumbledore--as if > Moody is forgetting that Harry was fifteen months old when > Dumbledore put out the lights on Privet Drive and can't possibly > have any recollection of the incident (even if he'd been awake). DD used the Put-Outer to turn the lights off way before Harry arrived. But Harry might have seen him turning the lights back on again. But *Moody*, on the other hand, most definitely wasn't there to see DD use the Put-Outer. As fas as we know anyway... (Hint ! Hint ! Lol ) > Alternatively, the "borrowed it from Dumbledore" line may just be a > rather clumsy way of presenting information to the reader without > having Harry ask Moody what the object is, a tactic that might have > needlessly slowed the pace of the narrative (and deprived us of a > chance for overanalysis). My question then is : why did we need to know that Moody was using DD's Put-Outer in the first place ? Moody owns quite a lot of magical devices, why not a Put-Outer ? If the narrator had told me nothing more, I would simply have assumed that either Moody owned his own PO, or DD had lent his to him. So as far as I was concerned, there was no need to explain the origin of the PO at all, which makes it all look very suspicious now :-) Del From gbannister10 at aol.com Fri Nov 28 07:50:29 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 07:50:29 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's "lordship"/anagrams (Was Dumbledore, Organ Grinder ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86015 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: Carol: > I'm pretty sure Voldemort's title is simply an > invention, a way to establish his own superiority, distance himself > from his wealthy but nonaristocratic muggle father, and deny his > "tainted" blood. And of course, the anagrams that could be created > from Tom Marvolo Riddle were probably somewhat limited. > Geoff: I have contemplated on a number of occasions on this "chicken and egg" situation. Did JKR start with Tom Marvolo Riddle and deduce "I am Lord Voldemort" or did she start with Lord Voldemort, which is linguistically very apt for our friendly neighbourhood arch-fiend and work it back into Tom, Tom, the Muggle's son? Geoff From jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl Fri Nov 28 15:50:38 2003 From: jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl (Juleczka) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 15:50:38 -0000 Subject: Luna and Harry was Re: Ask the Question Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86016 Laura wrote: I AGREE with you completely!!!! I couldn't have said it better myself. Luna will definately become closer to Harry. There is a strong significance of Rowling having LUNA talk with Harry at the end about death. Harry didn't feel comfortable around anyone, until he talked with Luna about the veil. There must also be some meaning behind Luna's name, Luna meaning the moon. I haven't quite had enough time to ponder about that, but there is definately a signifigance. Your thoughts???? I also think that there is a significance of Luna talking with Harry at the end of OOTP. I don't have the book with me but I remember that she said something about finding the things we've lost (Harry lost Sirius but maybe he will find a way to conact with him?) I can't remember what exactly she said but I'm sure that there was something about "things we love" and that they "always come back to us"... I really like Luna and I don't think she is mad, loony or something like that. I hope she and Harry become very close friends. As a matter of fact, she is the only person who can understand Harry's loss of Sirius... Neither Ron nor Hermione can fully understand what Harry feels. And it's also hard to talk about death with someone who doesn't know what it feels to lose the closest person. I think Harry will find it even irritating (this talking with Ron and Hermione about Sirius' death). Luna will surely play a big role in Harry's sixth year in Hogwart. Julia (Hi to everyone on this list!) PS. Sorry for my english, it's my second language. From erinellii at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 17:13:56 2003 From: erinellii at yahoo.com (erinellii) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 17:13:56 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's "lordship"/anagrams (Was Dumbledore, Organ Grinder ) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86017 > Carol: > Speaking of anagrams, how did anyone come up with Perseus Evans for > Severus Snape? Did someone just sit down and try to discover all the > possibilities using pencil and paper or did that person use a > computerized anagram generator? Was it before or after Lily's maiden > name was revealed as Evans? And has anyone made a similar attempt for other characters? Erin: Why, yes, I'm glad you asked that, indeed they have. Bill Weasley can be anagrammed as "will slay bee". A nice lady named Caroline emailed that one to me. She said she'd used an anagram generator. Is everyone aware that Dumbledore is the old English word for bumblebee? Just checking... Erin From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 17:25:45 2003 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 17:25:45 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031126234106.050bf5a0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86018 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Troels Forchhammer wrote: We know that there was seven years during which Gryffindor didn't win the Quidditch cup until they won it in Harry's third year, /and/ that the last time they won it it was with Charlie Weasley. That much is evident from PoA-12 'The Patronus': " 'Seriously,' said Professor McGonagall, and she was actually smiling. 'I daresay you'll need to get the feel of it before Saturday's match, won't you? And Potter - /do/ try and win, won't you? Or we'll be out of the running for the eighth year in a row, as Professor Snape was kind enough to remind me only last night ...' " (p. 184, Bloomsbury) and PoA-15 'The Quidditch Final': " The whole of Gryffindor House was obsessed with the coming match. Gryffindor hadn't won the Quidditch Cup since the legendary Charlie Weasley (Ron's second-oldest brother) had been Seeker. But Harry doubted whether any of them, even Wood, wanted to win as much as he did. The enmity ... " (p. 221f, Bloomsbury) I usually prefer this set of evidence which ties clearly to the Quidditch Cup (it is not clear in PS whether it's only the House Cup or both the House Cup and the Quidditch Cup that Slytherin has won for six years in a row), however, if we discount Harry's second year (where the Quidditch tournament was cancelled) the two numbers fit. > Troels ME: Thank you so much. That reference is exactly what I was looking for. I wasn't able to look it up because my POA book was being borrowed. I originally had Charlie's birth circa 1968-70 and Bill two years older. The comment from Ginny is what makes it difficult. Only if JKR had said Ginny was excited when Percy got his letter. LOL Marci From Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk Fri Nov 28 17:44:09 2003 From: Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk (Robert Shaw) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 17:44:09 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bang! You're Dead. References: <001201c3b554$02c60cc0$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: <047d01c3b5d7$3d54f580$27a987d9@robertft56e9wi> No: HPFGUIDX 86019 Kathryn Cawte wrote: >> However, is the wizarding world not at war with Voldemort? It seems >> that way to me....forgive me, but your own logic seems to point in my >> favour...Harry would be "somewhat justified" if he killed Voldemort >> then? (I personally don't think anyone would complain in the WW if >> he did....) > > I said that killinng someone in a war *when they are fighting back* is > justified. Not just killing them if they are unarmed and not > resisting. But can Voldemort ever be considered unarmed? Even wandless and half-dead he was still dangerous, as Quirrel found. Nor would Voldemort ever fail to resist capture, except as part of a trap. No terms of surrender he offered could be taken seriously. I'd say Voldemort must always be considered armed and dangerous, even when he appears superficially harmless. If Harry should find Voldemort sleeping peacefully, he should not hesitate to kill him out of moral qualms (though fear of a trap would be a very good reason to hesitate). For Harry to wake Voldemort up, so he can fight him in a fair duel, would be sheer folly. Of course, Harry should not do this lightly. He must remain aware that he could err in his judgement, and kill someone undeserving, but he'll have a century afterwards in which to assuage his guilt. -- Robert From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 18:23:05 2003 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 18:23:05 -0000 Subject: James, Lily, Snape, et al. (was: Timeline for ages & events...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86020 "angry_wangry" wrote: > Marci wrote: > > Check out new info added to timeline and see if you agree. Input > > appreciated. > > > I see you've put the birth year(s) of Snape, Lupin, James, Sirius et > al as 1955-6. I was just wondering how that was worked out? > > JKR said in an interview given just after GOF was released > (therefore summer 95 in canon) that Snape was 35/36, which would > have put his year of birth as 1959-1960, likewise the others in that > year at Hogwarts. > > Mad -x- I was wondering when someone would bring that up. My interpretation of her 35/36 comment was that is the age of the character she created when she started writing, meaning he was about that age in PS/SS. Marci From blackgold101 at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 18:32:34 2003 From: blackgold101 at yahoo.com (Marci) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 18:32:34 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lucius Malfoy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86021 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "meriaugust" wrote: > Hi everyone. Tried searching through the archives to see if anything > along this line of reasoning came up and saw none so I thought I'd > throw this out for discussion. I was thinking about Professor Snape > today and I was wondering how he got introduced to the Death Eaters. > I know that we have very little cannon about his family childhood > (aside from the two pensieve scenes there have been no other > mentions of Snape relatives or childhood experiences) so I wonder if > his father was a Death Eater and introduced his son to the fold. > (Which also brings up another point: maybe Snape leaving the DE's > had to do with getting back at his father, who, from what little > we've seen must have been an abusive personality. But that's another > post.) Then I started thinking that perhaps he and Lucius Malfoy may > have had a friendship of sorts while they were at Hogwarts. If > Malfoy was 41 in OotP and Snape was around 38 then they would have > been a few years apart and since they were both in Slytherin it is > possible that Snape looked up to the older Malfoy. Could Malfoy (as > pure a family as there ever was) have introduced the perhaps > impressionable Snape to LV? Hero worship perhaps? Just a thought. > Any ideas? > Meri In the 'Padfoot Returns' chapter of GOF, Sirius tells 'Harroninny' that Snape "was part of a gang of Slytherins who nearly all turned out to be Death Eaters." He's said to have been fascinated with the dark arts while at school, and knew more curses than even 7th years. Marci From cnorcombe at yahoo.co.uk Fri Nov 28 11:17:33 2003 From: cnorcombe at yahoo.co.uk (cnorcombe) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 11:17:33 -0000 Subject: Titled characters (WAS Voldemort's "lordship") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86022 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > Also, as far as we know, Salazar Slytherin was not a lord. In fact, > unless I'm forgetting someone, the only titled wizard in the series so > far is another dead one, the Bloody Baron. And possibly Sir Cadogan, > but he's only a knight. Hi All Nearly Headless Nick has a title - Sir Nicholas. Chris From alexandra_v at netcabo.pt Fri Nov 28 15:31:00 2003 From: alexandra_v at netcabo.pt (Alexandra Vieira) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 15:31:00 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Severus Snape = Perseus Evans References: Message-ID: <001801c3b5c4$a0bec460$c24c5451@ATM> No: HPFGUIDX 86023 Justcarol67 wrote: ? Speaking of anagrams, how did anyone come up with Perseus Evans for Severus Snape? ? Alexandra: Out of curiosity, Perseus is the name of another constellation. He's the one who slew Medusa! Check it out http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~dolan/constellations/constellations/Perseus.html Even if it turns out to be nothing more than a coincidence, it's a *hell* of a coincidence! Alexandra [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From kate_bag at hotmail.com Fri Nov 28 16:23:49 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 16:23:49 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Department of Mysteries Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86024 I just recently reread OoP, and something has been bothering me about it since. Maybe somebody could send me to earlier posts (I searched, but didn't find anything) or help me with some canon to figure out what happened... My question is, if the Order was guarding the Department of Mysteries, where was the guard the night Harry et al broke in? Why was there no guard stationed at the door that night? If there were, the entire disaster never would have happened. As far as I know, there had been no mention of the Order giving up guarding the DoM; in fact, it seems to me that it would be more important to guard after it was discovered that Voldemort could get in Harry's head and (as Dumbledore surely anticipated) possibly persuade him to collect the *weapon*. Any thoughts? ~Kate From kcerfontynechapman at hotmail.com Fri Nov 28 16:08:26 2003 From: kcerfontynechapman at hotmail.com (kittyfelix69) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 16:08:26 -0000 Subject: Sirius / Severus (long) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86025 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "greatlit2003" > wrote: > > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros" > > wrote: > > > Severus is on Severus' side, plain and simple. > > > He's got something he needs done and he'll do what it takes to see it > > > through. > > Brilliant. Ten points to your House :) In my opinion, that statement > > sums up what Severus is all about. > Why thank you! You can probably tell I've spent a lot of time > considering this. I love the fact that there are people who seem to have noticed how complex this thread of the story actually is. NB This is my first post, so there's a lot that's probably already been said on these boards that I've missed, but who else reckons that JK has, by this point in the series, in fact developed Snape's character so it's on a par, in terms of complexity, with Harry's? And in doing so, she must clearly be working up to a huge plot resolution in the final 2 books, that must resolve Harry and Severus's differences, in light of the risks Severus has always taken for Harry and the Order (although I'm praying that no 'Harry-I-am-your-father' -type revelations will occur, as that would be such an unoriginal letdown!) On the subject of whether or not Severus is capable of love, I'm thinking yes, but the person has to damn well earn it. This might sound strange bearing in mind that he seems like such an unlovable person, but let's be honest, he doesn't suffer fools gladly, and he's seen the kind of mess love can get you into when LV wants you dead and can use the information. So (and JK has hinted that Severus may fall in love/be redeemed by love in later books) who on earth, that we've seen so far, would be complex and tortured enough to be his soulmate? My guess is no-one. It would have to be a new character, who would easily be introduced through the DADA teacher thread; all the decent ones so far, lest we forget, have seen the worst that can happen. In all fairness, as well, the kind of intensive training that Harry will probably undertake in book 6 is going to require the kind of person who appreciates his sense of isolation and whom he identifies with in the same way he did with Sirius. This character and Severus would most probably, of course, hate each other's guts to begin with, in the way that people do when they feel an immediate, inexorable connection they can't explain. And yes, the next DADA teacher may well be Severus, but I can't help feeling like the reason he's been unable to get the job thus far is the fact that surely, to be able to teach the subject to the upper years at Hogwarts you must be able to conjure a full Patronus, and how are you going to do that with nil happy memories?? Oh, and I like the jock/weirdo analogy - is it me or is the Sirius/Severus/James/Lily class-of-73(?) backstory starting to give off a distinctly 'Breakfast Club' vibe?? "kittyfelix" From oneel at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 18:26:04 2003 From: oneel at yahoo.com (Tania Canedo) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 18:26:04 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lucius Malfoy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86027 Actually, I think Snape went to Voldy on his own, DD has talked about how much Snivellus loved the Dark Arts (which was also stated by Sirius & Lupin), so I think that he was thrilled with Voldy's ideas so he joined alone. He also speaks of hatred of "mud-bloods". Probably when he realized what Voldy's true intentions were he thought of backing out, but was afraid that he might get the same doom as Sirius' brother, so, probably that's why he became "double agent" About Malfoy and Snape, I think that they just became friends, but not quite as you say that he admired the other... Specially of what Umbridge said, that Lucius always speaks highly of him, that's what got me thinking that probably they where just friends, not worshiper and worshipee... Tania From kcawte at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 29 04:03:36 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 20:03:36 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bang! You're Dead. References: <001201c3b554$02c60cc0$a6706751@kathryn> <047d01c3b5d7$3d54f580$27a987d9@robertft56e9wi> Message-ID: <002101c3b62d$cf18d300$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 86028 Robert > But can Voldemort ever be considered unarmed? > > If Harry should find Voldemort sleeping peacefully, he should not > hesitate to kill him out of moral qualms (though fear of a trap would > be a very good reason to hesitate). > > For Harry to wake Voldemort up, so he can fight him in a fair duel, > would be sheer folly. > > K Now I certainly don't disagree with you about how unlikely it is for Voldemort to not be an active danger when Harry encounters him. I can't think of any situation outside of him being asleep (which since he would have guards/sidekicks is unlikely) or unconscious where he wouldn't be fighting back. However I do disagree that Harry should kill him in the above situation. I also agree that from a plot pov Voldemort really needs to end up dead to tie up all loose ends (especially if JKR seriously wants to resist writing any more stories). And I don't want him to fight a fair duel (for one thing a duel would be awkward with the brother wands) but he could stun him while he was asleep, hand him over to the Ministry and then frankly it's their problem as to how the legal system wants to deal with him. The Potterverse legal system doesn't seem to have the death penalty so I admit they may have a major problem doing that, but tough. For Harry to kill someone unnecessarily would make him as bad as any of the Death Eaters in my book. K From Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk Fri Nov 28 21:45:05 2003 From: Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk (Robert Shaw) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 21:45:05 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bang! You're Dead. References: <001201c3b554$02c60cc0$a6706751@kathryn> <047d01c3b5d7$3d54f580$27a987d9@robertft56e9wi> <002101c3b62d$cf18d300$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: <053701c3b5f8$fd2393f0$27a987d9@robertft56e9wi> No: HPFGUIDX 86029 Kathryn Cawte wrote: > I also agree that from a plot pov Voldemort really needs > to end up dead to tie up all loose ends (especially if JKR seriously > wants to resist writing any more stories). And I don't want him to > fight a fair duel (for one thing a duel would be awkward with the > brother wands) but he could stun him while he was asleep, hand him > over to the Ministry and then frankly it's their problem as to how > the legal system wants to deal with him. And if Voldemort should escape, Harry gets to feel guilty about all the resulting deaths, even though those deaths wouldn't really be his fault. > > For Harry to kill someone unnecessarily Care to define necessary? There are many possible shades of opinion available. You'd seem to agree that killing Voldemort is necessary so, if Harry is indeed the only the only one who can kill him, his killing Voldemort becomes necessary. > would make him as bad as any > of the Death Eaters in my book. Not in mine. The key differences are that Harry would know he had done wrong, that he would always regret the necessity, and that he would not let it set a precedent for his future actions. Choosing the lesser evil is tolerable, if you don't start pretending it wasn't really evil but rather resolve to do better the next time. -- Robert From kcawte at ntlworld.com Sat Nov 29 05:55:32 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 21:55:32 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bang! You're Dead. References: <001201c3b554$02c60cc0$a6706751@kathryn> <047d01c3b5d7$3d54f580$27a987d9@robertft56e9wi> <002101c3b62d$cf18d300$a6706751@kathryn> <053701c3b5f8$fd2393f0$27a987d9@robertft56e9wi> Message-ID: <001201c3b63d$67d15c20$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 86030 Robert > And if Voldemort should escape, Harry gets to feel guilty about > all the resulting deaths, even though those deaths wouldn't really > be his fault. > K That's illogical. He'll feel guilty for Voldemort killing people so he'll murder him instead - you don't think he might feel a tad bit *more* guilty? Robert > You'd seem to agree that killing Voldemort is necessary so, > if Harry is indeed the only the only one who can kill him, his > killing Voldemort becomes necessary. > K No I don't. I agree that from a plot pov it is necessary. However, to say that I have to step back from the story and look at it from the point of view of an author in which case they're just fictional characters anyway, so who cares? If we analyse it purely as fiction then pretty much all our discussions would boil down to 'what is his motivation?' 'whatever the heck JKR wants it to be' etc Within the story I do not agree that 'executing' Voldemort is necessary. If Harry kills him in self defence or defence of another or while apprehending him or accidentally that is necessary. However in the hypothetical and highly unlikely case that Voldemort were somehow asleep/unconscious/otherwise not actively posing a threat at that moment then that is murder and wrong. Robert > The key differences are that Harry would know he had > done wrong, that he would always regret the necessity, and > that he would not let it set a precedent for his future actions. > K I'm not keen on the justification that 'well I know it's wrong but never mind I'll feel *really* guilty about it later' Frankly, I don't think there's any chance that the situation I suggested will come up. I'm sure if/when Harry kills Voldemort it will be in a situation where it is somehow 'justifiable'. However, I think regardless of how justifiable it is Harry is going to tear himself up over it - because he does tend to blame himself for every evil in the world. K From quigonginger at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 22:09:46 2003 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:09:46 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86031 Art wrote: (after a snip) > According to Western law homicide is not murder when it is in > defence of one's own body or in defense of another person in > response to an initiation of force. > > In other words, Harry cannot morally go looking for a fight. He > must "kill" Voldemort during a battle that Voldemort initiates. Ginger responds: I think that is at the heart of the matter. Harry never goes looking for LV, rather, LV finds him, or lures him, or whatever. The exception if PS/SS, where Harry is not looking for LV, but finds him instead of Snape. Whenever Harry finds himself facing LV, it is in battle. If LV starts it, it is automaticly self-defence. Harry is most certainly aware of self-defence in Muggle law. Since the WW seems a bit "wilder", for lack of a better term, it is pretty safe to say that they have a self-defence clause as well. Otherwise, why dueling? back to Art: > Another quick note: Harry, in response to the prophecy, regards the > killing of Voldemort as "murder." There is no grey to his view. That > is a point that I believe lies at the heart of this adventure, > the "greying" of the rules that come with growing up. OR Harry is > already "premeditating" his murder of Voldemort. In that case, maybe > he shouldn't live past the end of the series.... > > Art. Ginger again: Interesting thought. Harry does see it as murder when he is sitting in DD's office. I suspect in the heat of battle, he would think otherwise. Your comment about "greying" is consistant with the overall nature of growing up both in RL and as JKR has presented it in the context of the books. I don't think Harry is "premeditating" in the sense of forming a plan, but I do think he is preparing himself. There is a huge difference. Now that he knows the prophecy, he needs to prepare himself to face whatever comes his way. That's just good self- defence. Harry noted in Gof (US p. 607) that "it all came back to Voldemort...." The "it" was the ruining of the lives Harry had been contemplating after veiwing the pensive in DD's office. Now that he knows the prophecy, he will have to realize that LV must be stopped at all costs, and like it or not, it comes down to him. I think the destruction of LV will take place in the heat of battle, not with Harry running into him at a fish and chips stand and taking him out as he munches his lunch. Not that I'd blame him if he did. Ginger, who wonders if the WW has a "Wanted Dead or Alive" type poster, and if this would make a moral difference on the fish and chips scenerio. From quigonginger at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 22:26:06 2003 From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:26:06 -0000 Subject: Ginny and the music box-CoS relation? (wasRe: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS -) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86032 Marianne answered the chapter questions rather well, but I am snipping all but the one that caught my eye: > > > 9) Why is Ginny the only one impervious to the music box's > > weakening effects and is able to shut it? > > Maybe she's tone-deaf. Ginger: I loved that answer. It amused me. It touches on something I have been wondering since CoS. What happened when Ginny was possessed? In OoP she says she had periods of time where she didn't remember anything. I think that may have been true for most of it. At the end, though, Riddle said she was crying when he made her go into the chamber and wait. I got the feeling that she was in a trance like state for most of it, and didn't remember. She did tell Tom via the diary that she "thought" she was the one doing it. At the end, though, she seemed to have resisted. Perhaps it was like the imperious where a person can learn to throw it off? At any rate, I wonder what it felt like for her. If it felt like the imperious, then it would be consistant with the feeling of the music box. Harry describes the imperious as a "floating sensation" ..."immensly relaxed" (GoF p.231 US) whereas the music box left people feeling "curiously weak and sleepy" (OoP p.116 US). Not exact, but close enough that Ginny may have felt a connection and knew it had to be broken. I think there is a lot more to Ginny's possesion, and that this may be a clue. Perhaps she will throw off the imperious at a fortuitous moment? Ginger, who has really speculated about those missing moments in Ginny's life. From ninnamie at yahoo.com Fri Nov 28 23:15:36 2003 From: ninnamie at yahoo.com (ninnamie) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 23:15:36 -0000 Subject: Metamorphagi In-Reply-To: <3FC6677D.5080704@cantab.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86033 > > > Is it possible that Harry could be a metamorphagi and the seemingly > > > unimportant anecdote from Book 1 is really a huge clue? > On one hand, it's not the kind of detail JKR would throw in without it having some much greater meaning later in the series. But at the same time, it seems unlikely that Harry could be a metamorphmagus without knowing it. And just the regrowth of his hair doesn't seem like enough evidence to support the theory, compared with Tonks's ability to change herself into an old woman and such. But if Harry isn't a metamorphmagus, then its importance must lie elsewhere. Perhaps Tonks will have a much larger role in books 6 and 7. Or perhaps another character whom we never suspected (Hermione? Luna? Goyle? Who knows!) will turn out to have this amazing ability. And just for the record, "metamorphmagi" is the plural, with "metamorphmagus" as singular. Kind of like cactus/cacti. From mlacats at aol.com Fri Nov 28 22:22:51 2003 From: mlacats at aol.com (mlacats at aol.com) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 17:22:51 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's Popularity Message-ID: <1c4.1258cb57.2cf924bb@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86034 In a message dated 11/13/2003 5:03:36 AM Pacific Standard Time, jwcpgh at yahoo.com writes: > >>The Sergeant Majorette says > >> > In the first four books, > >>he's a scrawny little four-eyed geek who keeps getting slapped > >upside the head by life. Then he adolesces, and it's not pretty. > > I deleted the other posts on this subject so it might look like I'm responding out of place but - on the subject as to why Harry wasn't ogled over more at Hogwarts... Who says he wasn't? JKR can't put everything that happens in the books or each one would be an encyclopedia... she said so herself. In Book 4 Ron is jealous of Harry because of all the attention he gets... so Harry does get a lot of attention but we just don't read about it all the time. At least that's my take on it. Harriet An intermitent contributor to the HP for Grownups message boards.... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From helen at odegard.com Fri Nov 28 23:54:37 2003 From: helen at odegard.com (Helen R. Granberry) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 15:54:37 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Metamorphagi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <004501c3b60a$fb575a40$6401a8c0@helenw1> No: HPFGUIDX 86035 > > > Is it possible that Harry could be a metamorphagi and the seemingly > > > unimportant anecdote from Book 1 is really a huge clue? > On one hand, it's not the kind of detail JKR would throw in without it having some much greater meaning later in the series.? But at the same time, it seems unlikely that Harry could be a metamorphmagus without knowing it.? And just the regrowth of his hair doesn't seem like enough evidence to support the theory, compared with Tonks's ability to change herself into an old woman and such. erm, but how would Harry recognize this ability? When has he had the chance to use it, except that time Petunia cut his hair? It is exactly like with the Parseltongue... we got a small hint of it in PS/SS when Harry could talk to the snake, but Harry didn't recognize this at all in himself -- he thought it was just one of those weird things, perfectly explained by him being a wizard. Of course he hasn't changed his hair color or made himself look old -- he hasn't had a reason to. Notice also that as Tonks is about to tell Harry more about Metamorphmagi, she interrupts herself. Now... my brain was going in over drive at this point, and I was screaming 'tell her about your hair!!!'. I wrote the following back in August: http://www.livejournal.com/users/lizardlaugh/19750.html Metamorphmagus!Harry and Harry Stu I've received a few complaints, or rather, a few concerns about the fact that I write Harry as a Metamorphmagus post-OotP. I have seen quite a few messages on various HP boards and on HP4GU saying that Harry shouldn't be one, that it makes him a Gary Stu, yadda, yadda, yadda. Anyway, despite being quite fond of Harry Stu as a fanon clich? (let's not forget, two of the most popular fics in the fandom feature blatant Harry Stu's *cough* wandless magic *cough*), I don't think it is Harry Stu-ism at all. In fact, I think there is some pretty strong canon evidence that Harry *is* a Metamorphmagus, and the whole purpose of Tonks as a character is to introduce that magical ability (well, that, and to teach young Harry the ways of the world -- thanks Jo!). What canon evidence you ask? Well, in PS/SS Harry recounts an incident in which Aunt Petunia, so frustrated with his crazy hair that never looks like it has been cut, cuts every bit of it off except for his bangs/fringe. He goes to bed, afraid of how the kids at school will make fun of him, wishing it would grow back. The next morning, it is exactly like it was before. Sure, Harry does other wandless, accidental magic, but much like the Parseltongue, this is a bit different in that it is something that not just any witch or wizard can do. Remember what Tonks says to Harry when he first meets her? Wizards can't just change their appearance at will. Unless they are Metamorphmagi, they must use complicated spells and potions. Harry doesn't need this to grow his hair back. While he does do other externally focused wandless magic, magical transfiguration on yourself is particularly difficult and potentially dangerous (note how long it took WPP to become Animagi and how often this idea of difficult self-transfiguration is re-enforced). Also note, the first bit of Metamorphmagi magic we see is Tonks changing her hair. Even on my first read of OotP, I was mentally kicking Harry, screaming 'tell her about your hair!!!' (I was also mentally shipping the two, but, heh, that is another topic for another day). In that same scene, Tonks says something along the lines of 'I bet you'd like to get rid of that scar' and Harry thinks about how he doesn't like people looking at his scar. The very last word of the very last chapter of the very last book in the series is 'scar'. Interesting, no? ETA In the scene where Tonks is explaining to Harry about Metamorphmagi, JKR interrupts her with 'we've got to pack'. She never finishes explaining how it is discovered or really anything else about the ability (extent someone can change, etc.). This is a classic JKR diversionary tactic. She needs to lay a clue, but she can't give away too much, so she interrupts the flow and diverts the reader's attention elsewhere (in this case, packing). Helen, who loves Metamorphmagus!Harry From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 00:56:31 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 00:56:31 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's animus toward the Potters/the prophecy (was Replay) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86036 >Arcum wrote: > Actually, I think Dumbledore couldn't AK Tom, for reasons due to the > very nature of an Unforgivable curse. Per Bella, a few pages before > their duel, we are told this: > > "Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you boy?... You need > to *mean* them, Potter! You need to really want to cause pain - to > enjoy it - righteous anger won't hurt me for long -" > > Note that she is talking about the whole category of Unforgivables, > not just Crucio. By extension, it seems reasonable to assume that to > AK someone you need to really want the other person to die, and > not just because you are justifiably angry at them. He'd need the > type of hate and loathing where he wouId actually *enjoy* his > death, and I don't really see that coming from Dumbledore. I agree with you, and that's the reason I think that Harry can't AK Voldemort or torture him with a Cruciatus curse or control him with an Imperius curse: Because Harry isn't evil and will never enjoy causing pain, even to Voldemort. If he reaches that level of hatred, he will be indistinguishable from Young Tom Riddle except in his choice of targets. And of course the "brother wands" would interfere with an unforgiveable curse as well--and if the curses are legalized so that the good guys can use them without penalty, the WW will dissolve into anarchy. Harry will have to find some other way to destroy Voldemort, perhaps involving love, the force that Voldemort can never understand, or a way to make LV's hatred backfire ("Protego"?). Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 01:23:59 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 01:23:59 -0000 Subject: Ravenclaw Mascot-Challenging Lexicon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86037 "Arya" wrote: > > I searched the archives and unbelievable cannot find anything on > this. > > > > I see on the Lexicon that Ravenclaw's house mascot is listed as the > Eagle > > and not a Raven. I am searching for canon to confirm the true > mascot of the > > House. Does anyone have any references they can point me towards > that I > > am missing and not recalling? > > > > Arya > > Ginger chimes in: I know there are others in the previous books, but > having just reread OoP, the first one that popped into my head was on > p. 683 US, right before the Ravenclaw/Gryffindor match. "Luna > Lovegood overtook them with what appeared to be a live eagle perched > on top of her head." > Ooh! Another one popped in! SS US paperback p.34 describes the > Hogwarts seal as having "a lion, an eagle, a badger, and a snake > surrounding a large letter H." > > I'm sure some eagle eyes out there will come up with more. Also it may be worth mentioning that Ravenclaw is named after Rowena Ravenclaw and that her personal symbol may be an eagle for reasons relating to her values rather than her name. True, the name Slytherin does suggest a snake, but it also reflects cunning and general "slipperiness" like that we see embodied in Lucius Malfoy. Nothing in Hufflepuff suggests a badger AFAIK. The name Gryffindor suggests a griffin, not a lion, which is only one of two beasts that compose a griffin, the other one being an eagle. In fact, it seems as if Ravenclaw and Gryffindor have split the griffin between them, with Gryffindor getting the rear half. Not sure what to make of that. . . . Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 01:31:11 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 01:31:11 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86038 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" wrote: > As I am not a chess player, I cannot add anything substantial to that > part of the discussion (sorry), but one thing has bugged me since my > first reading of SS. As Steve pointed out: > > And, as someone else pointed out, Ron had two chess pieces (Harry & > > Hermoione) that he had to guard at all cost, as well as trying to > > overpower his opponent. That substantially complicated the chess > game. > > So I wonder: > What would Ron have done had it been necessary to sacrifice Harry or > Hermione? I have been looking for clues in the other books as to > Ron's charactor, and have not come to a solid conclusion. I am > thinking of a situation where it had to be done not only to secure a > victory, but also to avoid imminent defeat. No time for stalling. > Now or never. > > Opinions? > > Ginger He couldn't have sacrificed Harry. The whole point was to win the game and move Harry forward. It was his quest, so to speak, and Ron and Hermione were only there to help. In winning the game regardless of his self-sacrifice, Ron had fulfilled his part--as Hermione had done with the Devil's Snare and would do again with Snape's riddle. The rest Harry had to do alone. BTW, this particular chapter illustrates the importance of teamwork and we'll almost certainly see indispensable contributions by Ron and Hermione in Books 6 and 7. Harry will not be the lone hero. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 01:43:08 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 01:43:08 -0000 Subject: Ravenclaw Mascot-Challenging Lexicon In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86039 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Mark" wrote: > Arya mentioned: > > I see on the Lexicon that Ravenclaw's house mascot is listed > > as the Eagle and not a Raven. > > I think you got confused by the name. Note that the mascot of > Griffindor is the Lion, and not a Griffin (which has the head of an > eagle and the body of a lion). > > But it still makes sense: Griffindor is known for bravery, as the > lion. While a Raven is a bird like an Eagle and usually "soars" > (reference to intellectual persuits). Though both are also > scavengers, so I don't know how that'd fit. > > Mark Like poets, heralds and other designers of state, national, or house emblems have always chosen to ignore the less noble aspects of eagles in using them as symbols. Look at the ancient Romans or the eighteenth-century Americans. Ben Franklin wanted a turkey as the national bird instead of an eagle; he was overruled. No one attributed nobility or similar virtues to a turkey. I'm not sure how eagles relate to intelligence, the trait Ravenclaws are most noted for, but the eagle's soaring flight and bright eyes have always weighed more heavily than its diet in determining its symbolic value. Carol, who is glad that we don't eat our national bird on Thanksgiving From RSFJenny19 at aol.com Sat Nov 29 01:46:19 2003 From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (Jenny) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 01:46:19 -0000 Subject: TBAY: In the control room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86040 Jenny watched Olivier's interaction with interest. Always a staunch supporter of Lupin, she found the breaking free theme quite intriguing. Before Erin could answer Olivier, Jenny posed a question of her own. "Do you truly feel that the only way for Lupin to become free is to be cured of his illness? That is the last thing I think could ever happen because it would cancel out one of JKR's biggest moral themes throughout the books." At Olivier's suprised look to this statement, Jenny explained, " think about it, JKR finds every way she can to focus on intolerance - pureblood vs. "mudbloods" (racism) and fear of infection by werewolves (AIDS/other infectious conditions) being two big ones - and you propose that Lupin's freedom is to be cured? That eliminates the issue, it doesn't resolve it. More important would be for Lupin's condition to not be a stigma, for him to be accepted in the WW. For Lupin to be truly freed, he would need to receive the recognition he deserves as a person in regard to his accomplishments and have him be accepted despite his condition. "As for Lupin leading the Order, I feel that Lupin would not find opposition to that in the Order anyway, it is outside, in the WW, that Lupin has no respect." That said, Jenny peered around at the video screens in the control room they were standing in, wondering if ESE!Bill would leave her alone if she told him she wasn't yet convinced of his nefarious nature. She was starting to feel very adrift in the discussion of intrigue concerning Lupin and BIll. Though she loved the both dearly, she still wasn't sure she wanted to examine possible betrayals by them. If they ever turned out to be true, how would she (not to mention poor Harry!) be able to bear it?? Much safer to be on her sturdy SILK GOWNS, where she was comfortable that those who might be more than met the eye weren't people she liked anyway. ~RSFJenny~ "Imagine wasting your time and energy persecuting merpeople when there are little toerags like Kreacher on the loose -" -Sirius Black http://www.geocities.com/rsfjenny/HP From andie at knownet.net Sat Nov 29 02:02:22 2003 From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 02:02:22 -0000 Subject: Ron's chess-playing skills In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86041 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: This particular chapter illustrates > the importance of teamwork and we'll almost certainly see > indispensable contributions by Ron and Hermione in Books 6 and 7. > Harry will not be the lone hero. > > Carol I agree with you that Harry will certainly have teamwork throughout the rest of the series, but I think that the trend will stay the same in that Harry can only go so far with help, and then he has to go it alone for the remainder of the journey. (This is true with many other stories as well), and so far has remained true with Harry. SS/PS - Teamwork: Ron & Hermione help through the tasks. Ron sacrifices himself to allow Harry to go on. BUT... Ron and Hermione are left behind while Harry goes on to fight Quirreldemort. CoS - Teamwork: Ron goes with Harry into the Chamber of Secrets. BUT... The rocks fall in the chamber, causing Ron to be left behind and Harry to go on without him to fight Riddle and the Basilisk and to save Ginny. PoA - Teamwork: Hermione and Harry set out with the Time Turner to save Buckbeak and Sirius. BUT... Harry leaves Hermione back at Hagrid's cabin when he delivers the Stag Patronus that saves all of their lives. GoF - Teamwork: Hermione and Ron help Harry practice all of the hexes and jinxes (as well as help him with the other tasks). BUT... Harry is alone in the graveyard, fighting Voldemort and his Death Eaters. OoP - Teamwork: Hermione, Ron, Luna, Ginny, and Neville all help Harry at the Ministry of Magic/Department of Mysteries. Neville even ends up going the farthest with Harry. BUT... Harry goes alone to seek revenge on Bellatrix. Again, while I agree that Harry is certainly not the lone hero, and teamwork is important, I still think that Harry's friends can only get him so far... the rest is up to him. :) grindieloe From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 02:05:32 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 02:05:32 -0000 Subject: Sirius / Severus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86042 - wrote: > > > > I don't agree with the concept of him wanting to die a splendidly > > heroic death. "Oh, let me die - and then they'll all be sorry!", > > or "Death will redeem me at last!". I think Snape wants to live > the > > same way as the rest of us usually do. I have no idea what his > post > > LV fall agenda might be and will not even attempt to conjecture. > > Mel wrote: > I don't think HE knows. > I stand by my belief that whatever is driving Severus in whatever > direction he's going in is strictly and deeply personal. I don't go > in for the LOLLIPOPS idea, but for those of you that do it just > sweetens the pot. I think that the only thing on Snape's agenda is > vengeance at any price and that the thought of which "side" he's on > is secondary at most. Severus is on Severus' side, plain and simple. > He's got something he needs done and he'll do what it takes to see it > through. > > THEN he'll plan his retirememt. If there is one. That, I believe may > be rather far down his list of priorities as well--again--vengeance > at any cost. > > > Mel--who hopes there is a retirement. I don't agree that Severus is on his own side or that he's seeking vengeance at any cost. If that were true, he would have murdered Sirius and Lupin in the Shrieking Shack and would not have attempted to save Harry on several occasions (countering Quirrell's spell, conjuring up stretchers to carry him and the others from the Shrieking Shack, alerting the Order about Harry's intention to enter the MoM). He has deliberately *severed* (or is in the process of *severing*) his connections with his natural allies (Lucius et al) and has worked for Dumbledore "at great personal risk." Something very powerful is motivating him to remain loyal to Hogwarts and Dumbledore. I don't think it has anything to do with Lily, but it undoubtedly ties in with the blood debt to James, which I think he tried but failed to pay. (I agree with the person who said that he tried to alert James to the danger of betrayal but failed to save him and feels obligated to make up for that failure by saving Harry once and for all.) But there's something else, too--something that causes Dumbledore to trust him and that prevents him from ever rejoining the Death Eaters. And whatever it is, it isn't fear of death at the hands of Voldemort. Snape is an odd combination of usually opposing characteristics: cunning and courage. To reduce his motive to simple vengeance is IMHO to greatly underestimate him. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 02:26:19 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 02:26:19 -0000 Subject: Legilimens and Occlumens and Snape's Reasons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86043 Zinaida asked: Was Snape purposefully extracting a particular kind > of memories - acting as a dementor, of sorts - to humiltiate > Harry? > I think Snape was intentionally extracting painful memories from Harry so that Harry could get some idea of how Voldemort could use legilmency against him. (Also, of course, most of Harry's memories are unhappy, as we know from the difficulty he had finding one that would work for the Patronus charm.) Harry had to see the necessity for learning occlumency. Unfortunately, he let his distrust of Snape (and his desire to find out what was behind the door) interfere with the effectiveness of the lessons. If he had applied himself, he would have learned occlumency. But He didn't want to. And then he was drawn to the Pensieve and saw at least one of the memories Snape least wanted him to see--and the damage was done. Snape is proud and he detests Harry, but he isn't a dementor or an agent of Voldemort. There is always a reason for his actions--and his emotions. Carol From melclaros at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 02:27:21 2003 From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 02:27:21 -0000 Subject: Sirius / Severus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86044 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" : > > I don't agree that Severus is on his own side or that he's seeking > vengeance at any cost. If that were true, he would have murdered > Sirius and Lupin in the Shrieking Shack me: Ah, but he's not stupid. Had he killed Lupin in the Shrieking Shack (the jury's out on what would have happened had he killed Black) he would have been thrown in Azkaban himself. Can't make much progress on a quest from prison. carol: and would not have attempted > to save Harry on several occasions (countering Quirrell's spell, > conjuring up stretchers to carry him and the others from the Shrieking> Shack, alerting the Order about Harry's intention to enter the MoM). me: He would have if he was seeking vengance on someone who's *own* sole purpose is the disposal of Harry. Picture old Voldy twirling his mustache muttering "Curses! Foiled again!" I think that would fit right into our Severus' plan. The man needs *some* fun. Carol: >Something very powerful is > motivating him to remain loyal to Hogwarts and Dumbledore. I don't > think it has anything to do with Lily, but it undoubtedly ties in with > the blood debt to James, which I think he tried but failed to pay. (I > agree with the person who said that he tried to alert James to the > danger of betrayal but failed to save him and feels obligated to make > up for that failure by saving Harry once and for all.) But there's > something else, too--something that causes Dumbledore to trust him and > that prevents him from ever rejoining the Death Eaters. And whatever > it is, it isn't fear of death at the hands of Voldemort. Snape is an > odd combination of usually opposing characteristics: cunning and > courage. To reduce his motive to simple vengeance is IMHO to greatly > underestimate him. Absolutely. I agree with evey word. I'm among those who believe Severus attempted to save the Potters before Godric's Hollow. I also believe he was the infamous eavesdropper and it was he who brought the whole filthy plan to Dumbledore's attention and did whatever he did "at great personal risk" to attempt to stop it. THAT's why Dumbledore trusts him, IMO. THAT's why Dumbledore won't tell Harry why he trusts him *and* why he never gave the name of the eavesdropper. We will find out what he did, and precisely why he did it but likely not until book 7--I believe he was present at Godric's Hollow that night. None of this, however, precludes a personal motive. Rest assured, I will *never* underestimate Severus. Mel From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sat Nov 29 02:29:23 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 21:29:23 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ravenclaw Mascot-Challenging Lexicon Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86045 In a message dated 11/28/2003 8:26:37 PM Eastern Standard Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: Nothing in Hufflepuff suggests a badger AFAIK. Sherrie here: T.H. White, in THE ONCE & FUTURE KING, talks about the hard work and tenacity of the Badger. Heraldically, the badger (or brock) represents bravery, perseverance and protection. IMHO, quite appropriate for Hufflepuff. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 02:44:38 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 02:44:38 -0000 Subject: Unsealing the Chamber (Was Ponderables...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86046 > wrote: > > > > , I still haven't > > read any wholly convincing explanations of how Voldemort got his > wand > > back.) > > > > Carol > > Maybe if Snape really was at Godric's Hollow the night the Potters > were murdered then he returned the wand to Voldie in GOF. > > Diana Snape? He had already left the DEs by that time and was spying for Dumbledore. If anything, he tried to warn James, not help to kill him. Peter Pettigrew, who betrayed James and Lily, might well have been present, but he murdered thirteen people with his own wand, which is also unaccounted for. He could hardly have hidden one wand, much less two, in his scanty rat fur while he posed as a rat for twelve years. I assume that his own wand was lost or destroyed when he left the murder scene, but where was Voldemort's wand? Surely Dumbledore and the rest of the Order searched Godric's Hollow, but if they found it, it would have been in Dumbledore's possession. Lucius might have found it once the Fidelius charm had been broken, assuming that Voldemort confided in him before the fact, but I don't buy the Riddle House theory. Neither Lucius nor anyone else could have gotten inside to search the house with old Frank on the alert. Lucius could have been with Voldemort when he killed the Potters and could have kept the wand in his basement hiding place. The problem is that it was PP who evidently returned the wand to Voldemort. Carol, who is giving up any attempt to solve the riddle tonight and hoping this message doesn't post twice From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 02:53:20 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 02:53:20 -0000 Subject: Traitor yet again (Was: Third Man in the Graveyard?) In-Reply-To: <000f01c3b387$b7efaa80$85e76151@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86047 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" wrote: > At the beginning of the series, Harry and Snape start with a strong dislike > of each other, with Harry convinced that Snape is the bad guy. > > Ever since, we've seen a process whereby Snape has been depicted as one of > the good guys: he's the one who abandoned the DEs and came over to > Dumbledore's side, he's the one who's putting himself in danger now for the > cause. > > I wonder, in a poll, how many of us would have Severus at the top of our > list of favourite characters? I would, for one. > > Is all of this a hint that JKR _is_ lining him up to be the traitor in the > last book, at the point that Harry has finally come to trust him? > > I'm not looking forward to it, but I've a nasty feeling that that could well > happen (thinking also about some of the remarks that JKR has made about > Snape in interviews...) > > Cheers > > Ffred I certainly hope you're wrong. I think that Dumbledore and Hermione will be proven right in their judgment of Snape and that he will finally repay his blood debt to James by saving Harry in some spectacular way. I only hope that he doesn't die in the process, but lately I'm starting to fear that he may be the Boromir of the HP series. (If not Snape, then definitely Percy.) Carol, who wants Snape to be fully redeemed and rewarded with the DADA post but doesn't want poor Percy to die either From AllieS426 at aol.com Sat Nov 29 02:56:06 2003 From: AllieS426 at aol.com (allies426) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 02:56:06 -0000 Subject: a prediction I've not yet read Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86048 My first post for the TBAY... At the end of PoA, Trelawney predicts the Dark Lord becoming "greater and more terrible than ever he was." Now, so far, we haven't seen this, because other than his loyal supporters (and whomever they have managed to Imperio) nobody else in the WW knew LV was back. Okay, so now they know. So my thought is, he needs to become greater and more terrible in a hurry, since we only have 2 books left. I think it will occur throughout book 6 (do we know when it's coming out? :) )... I think book 6 will run something like book 5, with things just getting worse and worse, but this time it's not just for Harry and Hogwarts, it's for everyone. I think at the END of book 6, *LV* (not crazy Bella) will kill somebody *very important* to Harry - maybe he'll finally get Dumbledore, but it had better not be Ron or Hermione - and this will be Harry's impetus to devote all of his energy, in book 7, to finding out a way to rid the WW of Voldemort once and for all. And maybe along his way he'll fulfill DD's dreams of a prejudice and corrupation free world. ;) Thoughts? Allie From melclaros at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 03:16:04 2003 From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 03:16:04 -0000 Subject: Traitor yet again (Was: Third Man in the Graveyard?) In-Reply-To: <000f01c3b387$b7efaa80$85e76151@f3b7j4> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86049 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "manawydan" wrote: > I wonder, in a poll, how many of us would have Severus at the top of our > list of favourite characters? > > Is all of this a hint that JKR _is_ lining him up to be the traitor in the > last book, at the point that Harry has finally come to trust him? > > I'm not looking forward to it, but I've a nasty feeling that that could well > happen (thinking also about some of the remarks that JKR has made about > Snape in interviews...) Well he's not *one* of my favorite characters, he is my *favorite* character. As to the good guy/bad guy thing--you mention the beginning of the series. It's in the beginning of the series that we get, through Harry's ears, a very emphatic speech from Dumbledore about *choices* and how important our choices are *in the end*. JKR has said a lot of cryptic things about Severus, but the one that really sticks in my craw is somewhere along the line, I believe it's in the infamous "who would want Snape to be in love with them" interview, where she continues on to say "...once you find out what he is." (or something along those lines. Something VERY close to that anyway.) I know I've posted this many times, I mentioned it just tonight in a reply to Carol--but the more I think about it the more I think Severus was the 'eavesdropper' in the Hog's Head who overheard (part of) the propehcy. It would explain a LOT of things while at the same time it (of course) raises a lot of questions. Like: Is it Severus's "Fault" that James and Lily Potter were targeted by Voldemort in the First Place? WHAT did he tell Voldemort? Did Snape "start it all"? Imagine the absolute horror and uncontrollable rage Harry would feel upon learning that his hated potions master was instrumental in his parents' murder. What's this got to do with choices? And Dumbledore's speech to Harry about how important they are *in the end*? Perhaps even then DD was setting Harry up to learn the truth about what had happened--but knew it was absolutely necessary for him not to learn about Snape's part in it until Harry was absolutely clear on Snape's CHOICE to switch sides and work to stop Voldemort--and that he made that choice prior to the Potter's murder and, we're likely to learn attempted, but failed to stop it. Harry's not ready to believe that yet. The fact that he'd "never trust Snape" was hammered into us at the end of OoP. See what happens when I have nothing to do? Mel From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Sat Nov 29 03:14:35 2003 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:14:35 +1300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] a prediction I've not yet read In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20031129160752.00a35690@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 86050 At 02:56 29/11/2003 +0000, you wrote: >Allie wrote - My first post for the TBAY... > >At the end of PoA, Trelawney predicts the Dark Lord becoming "greater >and more terrible than ever he was." Now, so far, we haven't seen >this, because other than his loyal supporters (and whomever they have >managed to Imperio) nobody else in the WW knew LV was back. Okay, so >now they know. > >So my thought is, he needs to become greater and more terrible in a >hurry, since we only have 2 books left. I think it will occur >throughout book 6 (do we know when it's coming out? :) )... I think >book 6 will run something like book 5, with things just getting worse >and worse, but this time it's not just for Harry and Hogwarts, it's >for everyone. I think at the END of book 6, *LV* (not crazy Bella) >will kill somebody *very important* to Harry - maybe he'll finally >get Dumbledore, but it had better not be Ron or Hermione - and this >will be Harry's impetus to devote all of his energy, in book 7, to >finding out a way to rid the WW of Voldemort once and for all. And >maybe along his way he'll fulfill DD's dreams of a prejudice and >corrupation free world. ;) > >Thoughts? > >Allie Tanya here My thoughts, well, this sums up a little on Dumbledore's efforts throughout the book of keeping his distance, notably to prevent LV spying through Harry, but it could also be that he was protecting himself and the others in the order. However, I would say there are several characters that Harry would "do anything for". My question is, why Sirius. Surely he would have the same response with the others he is close to. However, that statement, tough as it seems, bodes well for Snape until Harry and him bury the hatchet, then all guesses are off, lol. As for LV, what can he do that is worse or greater than he has done already? Very good question. Have to think on that one. What new power or achievement will he be able to harness. Tanya From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Sat Nov 29 03:36:01 2003 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:36:01 +1300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Traitor yet again (Was: Third Man in the Graveyard?) In-Reply-To: References: <000f01c3b387$b7efaa80$85e76151@f3b7j4> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20031129161934.0221a310@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 86051 At 03:16 29/11/2003 +0000, you wrote: >Mel wrote > >Well he's not *one* of my favorite characters, he is my *favorite* >character. As to the good guy/bad guy thing--you mention the >beginning of the series. It's in the beginning of the series that we >get, through Harry's ears, a very emphatic speech from Dumbledore >about *choices* and >how important our choices are *in the end*. > >JKR has said a lot of cryptic things about Severus, but the one that >really sticks in my craw is somewhere along the line, I believe it's >in the infamous "who would want Snape to be in love with them" >interview, where she continues on to say "...once you find out what >he is." (or something along those lines. Something VERY close to that >anyway.) > >I know I've posted this many times, I mentioned it just tonight in a >reply to Carol--but the more I think about it the more I think >Severus was the 'eavesdropper' in the Hog's Head who overheard (part >of) the propehcy. It would explain a LOT of things while at the same >time it (of course) raises a lot of questions. > >Like: >Is it Severus's "Fault" that James and Lily Potter were targeted by >Voldemort in the First Place? WHAT did he tell Voldemort? Did >Snape "start it all"? > >See what happens when I have nothing to do? >Mel Tanya here, preparing to duck. This post was very good. For the record, I really like Snape too, and commenting on the interview tidbit where JKR said some wouldn't like if they knew......................... A theory bantered about online I have seen is whether Snape was vampire, or part vampire, or not. Well, for me, if he is, won't change what I think of him. Heck how many drool over Remus, werewolf and all. That condition, so to speak would be on a level par with a vampire, both equally as dangerous and the prejudice as well. Now, the eavesdropper. I am going to go back and read it, see if I can get a fix in the time line of things for this. Remember Snape left LV around a year before the Godrics Hollow event. In the fight in the shrieking shack with Snape, Sirius and Lupin, Snape's speech maybe gives off some clues when he snarls about James not accepting he could be wrong in Sirius. I got the impression it was Snape's own sourced info. But hey, lets go right off the deep end. What if it was Snape, within the year of his defection when he was a double agent against LV. Just how much responsibility could Dumbledore be taking, could they have planted Snape to hear just a bit then get thrown out to start the ball rolling. I would not want to be Dumbledore if Harry found that out to be a fact. As for Harry not trusting Snape, he seems to be operating under similar conditions to Draco. Father hero worship. Both might have to rethink things if all sides are going to come together to fight. Unless of course Draco is recruited. Tanya, ducking fast..................................... Lol. I'm on a roll now. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 04:45:19 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 04:45:19 -0000 Subject: Sirius / Severus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86052 greatlit2003 wrote: > > > I see a lot of parallels between Sirius and Severus, and I wonder > why they are so different? They were both exposed to the Dark Arts > at a young age, and presumably had bad childhoods, including abusive > parents and dysfunctional families. So why did Sirius develop the > capability to love, and become an outgoing person, while Severus > withdrew into himself? I think that with these two characters, JKR > is examining two possible outcomes of similar situations. Granted, > we don't know everything about Severus yet, but from what we do > know, I think that it is safe to say that his past gave him a drive > to study the Dark Arts (possibly because of his father?) so that he > would be able to defend himself. Sirius, on the other hand, shunned > his past. > > Carol: I agree that there are a lot of parallels between Severus and Sirius, from similar first names and one-syllable last names to virtually identical coloring (black hair, black eyes, pale skin). Even Sirius's nickname as a dog ("Snuffles") reflects the cruel nickname he called Severus (Snivellus). A few, probably minor, differences, are that Sirius had a brother whereas Severus seems to be an only child; Severus's father was cruel and abusive and his mother seems weak, but Sirius's mother appears to have been the dominant parent; Severus's family appear to have been pure bloods but not wealthy but Sirius's family (also pure bloods) definitely had money. While all of these factors, especially Snape's abusive father and Sirius's wealthy parents, may have played a role in shaping Sirius into an arrogant, spoiled boy who later revealed a reckless courage and a capacity for love and Severus into a loner obsessed with the Dark Arts, who for unknown reasons joined and left the DEs and is now fighting against LV despite a continuing antipathy for MWPP and everything associated with it, but none seems important enough to account for the difference in their adult personalities. Why the difference, then (setting aside any genetic components that might partially determine personality traits)? Aside from the fact that Sirius, despite his many character flaws, hated his family and consequently wanted nothing to do with the Dark Side, he had a distinct advantage over Severus: he was handsome. Sad as it may be to admit, looks affect the way kids treat other kids. Handsome Sirius had only to say he was bored and James was ready to entertain him at Severus's expense. Severus, on the other hand, was the target of their abuse "because he exists." Skinny, greasy-haired, hook-nosed, a loner since his older friends had graduated, a Slytherin steeped in the Dark Arts, he was treated shabbily because of his looks and less than sparkling personality. Such treatment by popular boys reinforced his unpopularity. Not even the Slytherins in his own year seemed to care enough about him to defend him. No wonder he was angry and lonely and wanted to find someone, anyone, who would acknowledge and respect his brilliant mind and many gifts. Sirius, on the other hand, received recognition effortlessly: he was handsome, wealthy, easily scored well on exams, and was the best friend of a quidditch champion with an outgoing, fun-loving (if sometimes thoughtlessly cruel) personality. He was popular without ever seeking popularity. But his fortunes changed abruptly within a few years of graduation. After the bitter double shock of James's death and Peter's betrayal, he sat for twelve dark years in Azkaban, brooding on his innocence. When he found out that Peter was alive, he was obsessed with revenge--he plotted his escape with the sole motive of committing the murder he was imprisoned for committing. Only after Peter's identity was revealed to Lupin and Lupin reached out to him as a lost brother could Sirius stop obsessing over Wormtail and care about a small circle of people again. But as someone on this list pointed out, he'd had no opportunity to develop and grow in Azkaban. He remained emotionally an adolescent, wanting to resurrect James in Harry and add excitement to his limited life by risking his life and freedom for the new adventure of fighting for the Order. The adult Snape also takes risks, but he is not careless, and he is contemptuous of those who are. He is also unwilling or unable to let go of his miserable past. But things might have been very different if James and Remus had given him the indulgent friendship and brotherly love that they gave to the handsome Sirius, if looks and placement in Slytherin had not blinded all of them to Severus's many talents. But like Kreacher, who was unthinkingly abused by Sirius as something less than human, Severus was snubbed and abused and tormented because of what he looked like and who he was. No wonder he (apparently) turned again to the older friends who had once provided him with a sense of belonging. I think that their acceptance of him, their willingness to overlook his appearance and recognize his gifts, swayed Severus to join them and become a Death Eater. But something jarred him; something made him turn away and join the side of his tormentors. And that something, whatever it is, is the real key to Severus Snape. Carol From catlady at wicca.net Sat Nov 29 06:52:03 2003 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 06:52:03 -0000 Subject: Severus / Eagle / Raven / Rook / Killing Curses / Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86053 Arcum wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85825 : << Actually, I don't think Snape will be talking about how nice it was to get rid of Sirius, any more then he does about James. >> Sorry, I wasn't clear! I didn't mean Snape will be saying how nice it is that Sirius is gone because he means it (quite the contrary: he'll be feeling frustrated at not having Sirius to taunt). I meant he'll be saying it in order to annoy Harry, Lupin, and anyone else he can annoy. Suzanne wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85865 : << I predict that Snape will sacrifice himself in order to save Harry so that Harry can fulfill the prophecy and kill Voldemort. >> And Snape will be ecstatic at the opportunity to guilt-trip Harry for the whole rest of his life. Margaret Dean wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85840 : << Rowling may have wanted to avoid the negative connotations of the raven, but IMHO it would be a better mascot than the eagle for the "intellectual" house; the raven is one of the most intelligent birds out there. >> Mark Christianrooster wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85838 : << Though both are also scavengers, >> Ravens are intelligent and good flyers and black-haired, that is, -feathered, and when I tried to think what would the Trio's Animagus forms be if they became Animagi (which JKR has said in an interview that Harry won't), raven was my first choice for both Harry and Hermione. And maybe blue jay for Ron. In heraldry, the eagle is the King of Birds and symbolizes power and nobility rather than scavenging. The lion is the King of Beasts. I fantasize Rowena (whom I imagine red-haired and quite young) seizing upon the Roman eagle as her symbol in an "I'm as good as you are!" response to Godric's lion. Angel of the North wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85907 : << Rook Barty Crouch Jnr Knight Rookwood OR Dolohov >> I don't know about chess, but shouldn't ROOKwood be a Rook? I assume his family's arms are: on a field argent, spangled with green trees, a raven-like bird perched on a tower, both black. Allie wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85899 : << Which I don't understand in the first place, since there is only one "killing curse," and it's Avada Kedavra- so unless it was that, how *could* it have killed her? Seems to me like a "heart-stopping" curse or something along those lines would also be an unforgivable. >> Avada Kedavra kills a person without any symptom -- the Muggle coroner's report on the dead Riddles said that except for being dead they were in perfect health -- but there are curses that will kill people in other ways. Levitate a heavy rock over their head and then it drop on them. Shoot ropes out of your fingertips to wrap around the person's neck, then tighten them to strangle the person. Summon ("Accio!") their heart right out of their chest. Erin wrote in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85930 : << In PS, Wood compares Harry's and Charlie's flying styles. How would he be able to do that if he had never seen Charlie fly? I think it more reasonable to assume Charlie last won in his sixth year. That way, Wood could have seen him in his first year and Charlie's seventh year, and yet Wood would never have seen Gryffindor win a Quidditch cup. >> Ways in which Wood could have seen Charlie play Quidditch even tho' they weren't at Hogwarts at the same time: 1) In a world in which all photographs move, Wood could have watched snapshots of old matches in some sort of scrapbook. 2) Wood watched at least one Hogwarts Quidditch match in the year before he started at Hogwarts (as Steve bboy_mn detailed in http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85962 ) 3) After having left school, Charlie visited Hogwarts to play in an Former Pupils's match. Hey, maybe that the event five years before Triwizard Tournament for which Bill visited Hogwarts. 4) Wood saw Charlie play in a pick-up match at a Wood Family Reunion Picnic while Charlie was dating Wood's older sister. From bboy_mn at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 07:12:48 2003 From: bboy_mn at yahoo.com (Steve) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 07:12:48 -0000 Subject: Guarding the Department of Mysteries In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86054 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dj_bagshaw" wrote: > ...edited... > > My question is, if the Order was guarding the Department of > Mysteries, where was the guard the night Harry et al broke in? Why > was there no guard stationed at the door that night? If there were, > the entire disaster never would have happened. > > ...edited... > > Any thoughts? > > ~Kate bboy_mn: You only /assume/ that there was no guard there because you weren't shown a guard. Remember that a dozen Death Eater arrived at the Ministry before Harry got there. I would seem logical that the DE's would have taken care of the guards. There was probably a Security Guard, but it probably wasn't hard for the DE's to get rid of him. There may have even been a Order of the Phoenix guard on duty, but from previous experience, Voldemort would have know there was a OoP guard waiting and easily caught him by surprise. It seem perfectly logical that the DE's would have cleared Harry's path all the way to the Prophecy. Just a thought. bboy_mn From snapesmate at hotmail.com Sat Nov 29 08:25:53 2003 From: snapesmate at hotmail.com (snapesmate) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 08:25:53 -0000 Subject: Sirius / Severus/Lucius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86055 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > greatlit2003 wrote: > > > > > I see a lot of parallels between Sirius and Severus, and I wonder > > why they are so different? They were both exposed to the Dark Arts > > at a young age, and presumably had bad childhoods, including abusive > > parents and dysfunctional families. > > Carol: > I agree that there are a lot of parallels between Severus and Sirius, > from similar first names and one-syllable last names to virtually > identical coloring (black hair, black eyes, pale skin). Even Sirius's > nickname as a dog ("Snuffles") reflects the cruel nickname he called > Severus (Snivellus). A few, probably minor, differences, are that > Sirius had a brother whereas Severus seems to be an only child; > Severus's father was cruel and abusive and his mother seems weak, but > Sirius's mother appears to have been the dominant parent; Severus's > family appear to have been pure bloods but not wealthy but Sirius's > family (also pure bloods) definitely had money. While all of these > factors, especially Snape's abusive father and Sirius's wealthy > parents, may have played a role in shaping Sirius into an arrogant, > spoiled boy who later revealed a reckless courage and a capacity for > love and Severus into a loner obsessed with the Dark Arts I think that their acceptance of him, their willingness to > overlook his appearance and recognize his gifts, swayed Severus to > join them and become a Death Eater. But something jarred him; > something made him turn away and join the side of his tormentors. And > that something, whatever it is, is the real key to Severus Snape. > > Carol Many many moons ago I said much the same thing. That Sirius and Severus had many similar things in common. I have been wondering if they shared the same father, Severus being the illegitimate offspring of he and his mistress and Sirius being he and his wife's child. Some henpecked husbands are known to be abusive to their mistresses... On the flip side, Severus and Lucius may be opposites appearance wise: black/white-blonde, dark eyes/gray eyes, I have also pondered whether Severus and Lucius are half brothers. There must be a reasonable explaination as to why Lucius, a devoted Voldemort butt kisser is so tight with Severus, whom Sirius described as Lucius' "lap dog" and whom Voldemort appears to have described as the "one who has left him for good and would of course be killed". It is hard to believe Lucius would not know what Severus gets up to for Dumbledore. I thought the remark Sirius made about how Lucius must be overjoyed that Severus is teaching at Hogwarts (in OotP) was very significant. Why would Lucius be so happy about it? Is it because Lucius seems to hate and very much wants to get Dumbledore removed as headmaster? Lucius speaks highly of Severus to members of the Ministry. Pretty risky for a Voldemort follower considering other DEs (we know there are DEs working for the Ministry) would most likely hear about it and pass it on to old scaley drawers. Don't you think? I also felt Severus' reaction in the hospital scene near the end of GoF, when Harry described Lucius Malfoy was one of the DEs at the graveyard was important as well. The way he started to motion to Harry while glancing over at Fudge? Lucius Malfoy seems to be rather important to Snape. Why? Lucius is a DE, something Snape has turned his back on. Why does he still carry on a relationship, whatever it is based on, with him. Lynnette, who thinks Severus Snape IS a good guy, even if he is NOT a nice guy! From mpjdekker at hotmail.com Sat Nov 29 08:38:44 2003 From: mpjdekker at hotmail.com (mightymaus75) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 08:38:44 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86056 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mightymaus75" > > > Actually that was me applying fictional ethical principles to the > > real world. I would never dare to impose my real world views on > > JKR to tell her what she can and cannot write. While you may not > > feel that the original comment was really applicable to you, > > personally I feel rather strong about the Centaur and Goblin > > rights to life being trampled here. > > > > Somehow this thread seems to be developing into the equivalent of > castigating Green activists because they're not doing enough for > Kermit the Frog. > > Erm, you do realise that they're not real, don't you? > That nobody has suggested killing Centaurs or Goblins in the time- > line of the books anyway? > That "A right to life" is just a slogan, a shorthand phrase > generally used when disagreeing with governmental or judicial > edicts? > That everyone can shout it as loud and long as they like, but that > death, in whatever form, be it accidental or intentional, will take > absolutely no notice whatsoever? > > However, since you seem to be fixed in your views, let me pose you > some moral questions within the terms of reference that you have > set. > > The Goblins appear to be quite unperturbed about inflicting a slow > and painful death upon burglars. Indeed, they seem to relish the > thought. Defend this please, particularly with regards to a right > to life. > > Centaurs have clearly expressed a willingness to kill for the > heinous crime of trespass. > Defend this please, particularly with regards to a right to life. > > Centaurs attack, with murderous intent, one of their own for > *associating* with human wizards. > Defend, as above, and also explain why such speciesist intolerance, > which, if practiced by wizards, I'm sure you would condemn is, in > the books, considered to be an understandable, though unfortunate, > attitude. > > I'll be interested to read your answers, perhaps you may even come > round to my view that the moralities of the Potterverse are > necessarily different. > > Kneasy You do realise I wasn't being serious, don't you? Still, I don't really see why the behaviour of other species should have any bearing on the moral standards of the wizarding community. Even if the behaviour of others forces wizards to act in direct violation of their own moral guidelines, that still shouldn't effect the basic moral standards on which those guidelines are based. However, since you seem to insist: In a world full of magic it apparently isn't possible to run a bank without some very severe burglar deterrents. If some of the more blood thirsty goblins derive some amusement from this, it is not as if they haven't got good reason to do so. The goblins are treated very much the same way as oppressed minorities have always been treated throughout history: wizards have for centuries been denying goblins certain freedoms, the MoM is abusing its powers to short change the goblins whenever it feels this is convenient, and now it seems the Minister of Magic is planning to rob them of their only source of income. It's no wonder that there have been several goblin rebellions in the past. The centaurs on the other hand are a very proud race, which, because of humans, has been forced to restrict itself to a limited number of habitats. While FBWTFT mentions that unicorns and merpeople are only too happy to stay within the territories designated for their use, curiously it doesn't mention the centaurs. It's not without reason that they react somewhat testy towards humans coming into their world without their permission, they themselves aren't allowed to come into the human world outside of the habitat. Killing anyone who ignores their warning may seem like an overreaction, but then centaurs were always more concerned with the bigger picture. Centaurs at least don't have a double standard. As you so nicely pointed out they just as easily kill one of their own. Which brings us back to your statement that it's okay to kill Voldemort as long as he isn't human. Saying that humans somehow are more entitled to live than non-humans *is* a very dubious double standard. I never objected to the fact that Voldemort should be killed. I would also never presume to judge the morality of other cultures. On the other hand, even though the goblin and centaur behaviour you mentioned may be understandable and unfortunate, that still doesn't mean we have to approve of such behaviour ourselves. Does that answer your questions? -Maus From CareALotsClouds at aol.com Sat Nov 29 08:54:56 2003 From: CareALotsClouds at aol.com (CareALotsClouds at aol.com) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 03:54:56 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Crouch, the son Voldy never had. Message-ID: <87.345e0f.2cf9b8e0@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86057 I was remembering the other day how after Harry escapes Voldy in the graveyard, when Crouch takes him inside. Crouch says to him in the room: pg 589 English edition: 'The Dark Lord didn't manage to kill you, Potter, and he so wanted to,' whispered Moody. 'Imagine how he will reward me, when he finds I have done it for him. I gave you to him - the thing he needed above all to regenerate - and then I killed you for him. I will be honoured beyond all other Death Eaters. I will be his dearest, his closest supporter ... closer than a son ...' Harry says 'You're mad'. And rightly so in my opinion. Am I the only one that thinks that Voldy would actually be offended if Crouch killed Harry? I thought Voldy might punish him for it actually. How humiliating for him when he couldnt kill Harry and then one of his Death Eaters just comes along and kills him. I dont think Voldy would like that. I know it doesn't matter and it has no effect on the story whatsoever, apart from the fact that no Death Eater would ever actually kill Harry because of this reasoning. Loadsa love Nic xx x x Who thinks Barty Jr was indeed mad. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From queen_amidalachic at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 10:13:44 2003 From: queen_amidalachic at yahoo.com (Maria) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 10:13:44 -0000 Subject: Crouch, the son Voldy never had. In-Reply-To: <87.345e0f.2cf9b8e0@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86058 CareALotsClouds at a... wrote: I will be his dearest, his closest supporter ... closer than a son ...' > > Harry says 'You're mad'. And rightly so in my opinion. Am I the only one > that thinks that Voldy would actually be offended if Crouch killed Harry? I > thought Voldy might punish him for it actually. How humiliating for him when he > couldnt kill Harry and then one of his Death Eaters just comes along and kills > him. I dont think Voldy would like that. I know it doesn't matter and it > has no effect on the story whatsoever, apart from the fact that no Death Eater > would ever actually kill Harry because of this reasoning. Me Yeah that is what I've been thinking as well! This had me thinking, because I'm writing a fic myself where Harry and a D.E are trapped and can't get out of this sort of otherworld until one side is defeated in battle. And this possibility of a D.E killing Harry rather than Voldemort himself had the Dark Lord in a very p*ssed off mood, because he wants to do it himself. In OOTP we learn that Sirius' brother is killed by a D.E and Harry asks if Voldemort did it. But Voldemort didn't kill Rigelus because he was not important enough. But we see Voldemort going to the Potters to kill Harry himself. In the case of Crouch Jr, I see this man being so obsessed in pleasing his Master, that his obsession carries to far and is blinded by the fact that Voldemort wanted to kill him. So I would think Voldemort would have been very angry if Crouch did. Maria Evilravenclaw fanart http://www.geocities.com/queen_amidalachic/index.html From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sat Nov 29 12:08:03 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 12:08:03 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86059 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mightymaus75" > > You do realise I wasn't being serious, don't you? Kneasy: I certainly hoped you weren't. But I've had some *very* odd off-site mails that have taught me to test the ground carefully before making assumptions like that. Maus: > Still, I don't really see why the behaviour of other species should > have any bearing on the moral standards of the wizarding community. > Even if the behaviour of others forces wizards to act in direct > violation of their own moral guidelines, that still shouldn't effect > the basic moral standards on which those guidelines are based. > However, since you seem to insist: > > In a world full of magic it apparently isn't possible to run a bank > without some very severe burglar deterrents. If some of the more > blood thirsty goblins derive some amusement from this, it is not as > if they haven't got good reason to do so. The goblins are treated > very much the same way as oppressed minorities have always been > treated throughout history: wizards have for centuries been denying > goblins certain freedoms, the MoM is abusing its powers to short > change the goblins whenever it feels this is convenient, and now it > seems the Minister of Magic is planning to rob them of their only > source of income. It's no wonder that there have been several goblin > rebellions in the past. > Kneasy: That's interesting. Must make life for wizards bloody complicated too. If all sentient creatures have differing codes of morality, then wizards would have to adjust theirs when dealing with them. For example, suppose Bill Weasley found that another wizard was lifting stuff from the Bank. In the WW this might merit a couple of years in the slammer. But if he reports it to his superiors, as no doubt he is supposed to, it might result in something more permanent. Does he let him go or hand him over? Which code of ethics does he follow? We haven't been told what these 'rights' consist of and they don't seem to be very oppressed so far as I can see. Everybody seems to act very cautiously around them. Note that the 'goodies' are trying hard to persuade the Goblins to join them, without a great deal of success; the other side is trying to recruit them too. This to me, implies a great deal of autonomy and power, too. The Goblins are reported as being unhappy at not being allowed to do what they want, but it could be a mistake to assume that they are naturally beneficent. They could have some very nasty practices that they consider traditional and which might be very unpleasant indeed. It is worth remembering that according to the introduction of FBaWTFT, the Goblins did everything they could to wreck the meetings called to decide which creatures would have legal rights as beings and be subject to any of the new magical laws then open for discussion, even though they would obviously be classed as beings themselves. Was it because they didn't want any laws? The idea that the MoM wants to rob them of their banking business is a load of old rubbish IMO. More sensationalist tripe from the Quibbler. In traditional mythology Goblins are nasty verging on evil. I've seen nothing in the series to alter that perception. Maus: > The centaurs on the other hand are a very proud race, which, because > of humans, has been forced to restrict itself to a limited number of > habitats. While FBWTFT mentions that unicorns and merpeople are only > too happy to stay within the territories designated for their use, > curiously it doesn't mention the centaurs. It's not without reason > that they react somewhat testy towards humans coming into their world > without their permission, they themselves aren't allowed to come into > the human world outside of the habitat. Kneasy: Not so. FBaWTFT states that they *prefer* to live apart, objected to some other creatures who were awarded 'being' status and declared that they would manage their own affairs. They are classed as 'beasts' at their own request. They are classified as dangerous. Personally, I see nothing wrong in allowing unforgivable curses to be used against self-defined dangerous beasts. They also have a pretty bad press in classical mythology. Maus: > Which brings us back to your statement that it's okay to kill > Voldemort as long as he isn't human. Saying that humans somehow are > more entitled to live than non-humans *is* a very dubious double > standard. I never objected to the fact that Voldemort should be > killed. I would also never presume to judge the morality of other > cultures. On the other hand, even though the goblin and centaur > behaviour you mentioned may be understandable and unfortunate, that > still doesn't mean we have to approve of such behaviour ourselves. Kneasy: No, it's the Potterverse that apparently shows double standards. (Now if it was me writing the books there'd be bodies of all species, including wizards, scattered over the landscape.) But I'm assuming that these 'double standards' are there for a reason, a reason more interesting than the all too common breast-beating "we are always in the wrong and must abase ourselves accordingly" tendency. Nope, Voldy deserves no mercy, not even if he were still human. Any other outcome would be most unsatisfactory, IMO. Can you think of another worth-while epic tale where the chief baddy doesn't get his just desserts and come to a sticky end? Bugger morality, I want satisfaction. From silmariel at telefonica.net Sat Nov 29 14:27:26 2003 From: silmariel at telefonica.net (silmariel) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 15:27:26 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Voldemort's "lordship"/anagrams (Was Dumbledore, Organ Grinder ) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <200311291527.26791.silmariel@telefonica.net> No: HPFGUIDX 86060 > Erin: > Why, yes, I'm glad you asked that, indeed they have. Bill Weasley > can be anagrammed as "will slay bee". A nice lady named Caroline > emailed that one to me. She said she'd used an anagram generator. > I've used the only free on-line anagram generator I've found. Others limit the use and are made for marketing reasons, but this one is just an anagram generator, the lenght of the string to be anagramed depends on the server charge for the day. It can be also used by mail, for those who have restricted access to the net. The first reach result for anagram in google: http://www.wordsmith.org/anagram/ Fleur Delacourt - let Draco rueful Draco Malfoy - coma for lady Phineas Nigellus- Snape lies lungs hi Anagram and enjoy! Silmariel From Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk Sat Nov 29 14:46:42 2003 From: Robert at shavian.fsnet.co.uk (Robert Shaw) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 14:46:42 -0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bang! You're Dead. References: <001201c3b554$02c60cc0$a6706751@kathryn> <047d01c3b5d7$3d54f580$27a987d9@robertft56e9wi> <002101c3b62d$cf18d300$a6706751@kathryn> <053701c3b5f8$fd2393f0$27a987d9@robertft56e9wi> <001201c3b63d$67d15c20$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: <056301c3b687$a02f7210$27a987d9@robertft56e9wi> No: HPFGUIDX 86061 Kathryn Cawte wrote: > Robert >> And if Voldemort should escape, Harry gets to feel guilty about >> all the resulting deaths, even though those deaths wouldn't really >> be his fault. >> > > That's illogical. He'll feel guilty for Voldemort killing people so > he'll murder him instead - you don't think he might feel a tad bit > *more* guilty? > Surely one death is less bothersome than one hundred. Harry will feel guilty either way, but killing Voldemort will benefit more people. Kat wrote > > Robert >> You'd seem to agree that killing Voldemort is necessary so, >> if Harry is indeed the only the only one who can kill him, his >> killing Voldemort becomes necessary. >> > Within the story I do not agree that 'executing' Voldemort is > necessary. If Harry kills him in self defence or defence of another > or while apprehending him or accidentally that is necessary. Killing Voldemort is automatically both self-defence and protection of others. Given the prophecy, the only alternative is to let Voldemort continue with his evil plans, which include killing Harry and many others. Self-defence doesn't mean only reacting, it also allow for pre-emptive action to ward off inevitable threats. > > >> The key differences are that Harry would know he had >> done wrong, that he would always regret the necessity, and >> that he would not let it set a precedent for his future actions. >> > K > > I'm not keen on the justification that 'well I know it's wrong but > never mind I'll feel *really* guilty about it later' > Of course. If you, or Harry, were happy about it, it would be too easy for you to repeat your misdeeds later. If Harry thought feeling guilty afterwards would be enough, he'd be wrong, but as long as he doesn't think that way feeling guilty will be enough. It's the diffference between looking at the moral maze from above, and from the inside. More generally, sometimes there are no good choices, only lesser evils, and failing to choose is itself a choice. Moral codes that can't cope with such dilemmas might work in a community of saints but are not robust enough for real life. -- Robert From dcyasser at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 14:47:33 2003 From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 14:47:33 -0000 Subject: Metamorphagi In-Reply-To: <004501c3b60a$fb575a40$6401a8c0@helenw1> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86062 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Helen R. Granberry" wrote: > > Metamorphmagus!Harry and Harry Stu > I've received a few complaints, or rather, a few concerns about the fact that I write Harry as a Metamorphmagus post-OotP. I have seen quite a few messages on various HP boards and on HP4GU saying that Harry shouldn't be one, that it makes him a Gary Stu, yadda, yadda, yadda. > > Anyway, despite being quite fond of Harry Stu as a fanon clich? (let's not forget, two of the most popular fics in the fandom feature blatant Harry Stu's *cough* wandless magic *cough*), I don't think it is Harry Stu-ism at all. In fact, I think there is some pretty strong canon evidence that Harry *is* a Metamorphmagus, and the whole purpose of Tonks as a character is to introduce that magical ability (well, that,and to teach young Harry the ways of the world -- thanks Jo!). > >ETA In the scene where Tonks is explaining to Harry about Metamorphmagi,JKR interrupts her with 'we've got to pack'. She never finishes explaining how it is discovered or really anything else about the ability (extent someone can change, etc.). This is a classic JKR diversionary tactic. She needs to lay a clue, but she can't give away too much, so she interrupts the flow and diverts the reader's attention elsewhere (in this case, packing). dc: UM, OK, I'm willing to expose my naivete in order to get some information. I see no problem with fanfics taking forward a Metamorphmagus!Harry based on canon; you're certainly on target with the JKR-interruption-theory that something is important about it. (Although didn't JKR say somewhere, and I absolutely can't source this, that Harry would not be a Metamorphmagus?) My question is, why is this theory frowned upon, and why is it frowned upon to further speculate (in the guise of fanfic, which I think is a variation on theoretic posts) on wandless magic Harry? I know posters elsewhere and sometimes here can become very possessive about their interpretation of canon. Let's face it, they can become possessive of Harry himself. So can you please explain to me, offline if it is inappropriate to the conversation here, um, just what is a Harry Stu, as in *cough* wandless magic *cough*, and who among us designates it so? dc From artcase at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 15:30:33 2003 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 15:30:33 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead./Greek Tragedy In-Reply-To: <056301c3b687$a02f7210$27a987d9@robertft56e9wi> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86063 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Robert Shaw" wrote: ... > Harry will feel guilty either way, but killing Voldemort will > benefit more people. > Art here: Guilt used to be explained as a punishment from the gods. ...Robert again: > It's the diffference between looking at the moral maze > from above, and from the inside. > > More generally, sometimes there are no good choices, only > lesser evils, and failing to choose is itself a choice. > > Moral codes that can't cope with such dilemmas might work > in a community of saints but are not robust enough for real life. > > -- > Robert Art again: Which brings me to a parallel post, the concept of Greek tragedy. Being a research nut, I am going through the story of Orestes/Electra. For those who have not delved so far into tragedy this story does not end well until the poets changed the story. Orestes killed his uncle because his uncle killed his father and started sleeping with his mother. Orestes also killed his mother because she betrayed his father. According to Greek tradition, (and later carried through Roman values) Patricide and Matricide are two most henious crimes. The penalty is death no matter what the circumstance unless (later according to Plato) the death is accidental and the parent has time to forgive the child before they die. I'm relating this as it applies to Voldemort. He is guilty of patricide. In the same code (Plato) a person cannot strike/kill a person more than twenty years their senior - out of respect for their elders. Penalty ranges (dependant on circumstance) from death to exile for three years (the same amount of time for the killing of a stranger). Relating this to Harry's position, even to defend his life (according to Greek tragedy) he cannot kill Voldemort without suffering the wrath the Furies. Dumbledore ideally would be in a position to defeat Voldemort and choses not to. Interesting. IF Harry is being set up as an agent of the Furies, he is still walking on the edge of a slippery sword. Orestes had a similar fate and until public opinion shifted and the poets re-wrote the tragic tale, he died, and his sister, Electra, committed suicide for her part in the murder of thier mother. Historical reference and western law aside, I am inclined to wonder how in a children's story you can accurately build this complex of an issue to fruition without alienating readers. I sincerely hope the model of a tragedy continues with questionable outcomes. But, I fear the rather new notion of "Love conquers all" may prevail. This is just conjecture on my part. Thoughts? From houseofbohacek at earthlink.net Sat Nov 29 15:36:20 2003 From: houseofbohacek at earthlink.net (Gail Bohacek) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 10:36:20 -0500 Subject: (FILK) Good Headmaster Dumbledore Message-ID: <410-2200311629153620885@earthlink.net> No: HPFGUIDX 86064 Good Headmaster Dumbledore (A Christmas FILK by Gail Bohacek to the tune of _Good King Wenceslas_) My all-time favorite Christmas carol...though my version has only four stanzas as opposed to the original's five. Sing along to the Midi here: http://wilstar.com/xmas/wenceslas.htm P.O.A. Chapter 11 Good Headmaster Dumbledore In the Great Hall was found Christmas time had come once more Professors gathered 'round McGonagall, Snape and Sprout Filch and Flitwick were there Even Trelawney came out And sat down in a chair Harry and his friends had come WIth two first-years, nervous And a Slyth'rin who looked glum All else left the campus Since there were so few people D'dore said, "It's better For us to use one table So let's sit together!" Dumbledore offered to Snape With much joyful laughter Wrapped up in some silver tape The end of a cracker Reluctantly Snape tugged at It and with a loud pop Revealed a large pointed hat With a stuffed vulture on top Remembering the Boggart Harry at Ron did grin As if he had something tart, Snape's mouth quickly grew thin Good Headmaster Dumbledore Took from the Professor And upon his head he wore The hat to Snape's displeasure - Gail B. houseofbohacek at earthlink.net Why Wait? Move to EarthLink. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From artcase at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 15:39:45 2003 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 15:39:45 -0000 Subject: AK - Adava Kedavra Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86065 ..--***! Abra Cadabra with a head cold... and someone dies of fright. When the bodies of Tom Riddle's family were found (don't have direct quote, perhaps someone could be so kind...) there were no physical symptoms of how they could of died, except they all had a look of fright on their faces. I am inclined to conclude they were frightened to death. Art From artcase at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 15:50:13 2003 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 15:50:13 -0000 Subject: Legilimens and Occlumens and Snape's Reasons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86066 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > I think Snape was intentionally extracting painful memories from Harry > so that Harry could get some idea of how Voldemort could use > legilmency against him. (Also, of course, most of Harry's memories are > unhappy, as we know from the difficulty he had finding one that would > work for the Patronus charm.) Harry had to see the necessity for > learning occlumency. Unfortunately, he let his distrust of Snape (and > his desire to find out what was behind the door) interfere with the > effectiveness of the lessons. If he had applied himself, he would have > learned occlumency. But He didn't want to. And then he was drawn to > the Pensieve and saw at least one of the memories Snape least wanted > him to see--and the damage was done. Snape is proud and he detests > Harry, but he isn't a dementor or an agent of Voldemort. There is > always a reason for his actions--and his emotions. > > Carol I disagree. Some schools of thought in dog training use shock collars and negative response to get a dog to behave. Snape used Harry's worst memories to trigger a reaction of aversion inside Harry's head. Through this process, Snape was trying to make Harry learn to put up mental walls to keep Snape from gloating over Harry's memories. The scene where Harry uses the stinging hex to repel Snape seems interesting. Not only is Harry building walls of defense, but he fires back in offense. This, I believe is something NEW. That is why it surprised Snape so much. *Powers even LV does not even know* comes to mind.... Art From artcase at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 15:59:43 2003 From: artcase at yahoo.com (artcase) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 15:59:43 -0000 Subject: Voldemort's "lordship"/anagrams (Was Dumbledore, Organ Grinder ) In-Reply-To: <200311291527.26791.silmariel@telefonica.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86067 Thanks for the link, Silmariel! I typed in Severus Snape and came up with: SAVE PURENESS I'm sure that has come up before, but it was interesting to say the least. Pureness as in Good, or Pureness as in Wizarding blood... Art From melclaros at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 16:46:16 2003 From: melclaros at yahoo.com (melclaros) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:46:16 -0000 Subject: Legilimens and Occlumens and Snape's Reasons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86068 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "artcase" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > > The scene where Harry uses the stinging hex to repel Snape seems > interesting. Not only is Harry building walls of defense, but he > fires back in offense. This, I believe is something NEW. That is why > it surprised Snape so much. *Powers even LV does not even know* > comes to mind.... I don't think it is something new, just something not previoulsy noted. I think this is a clue to where Harry's true power lies and how he, as an infant, survived Voldy's AK and did away with the DL (as far as anyone knew). It appears, from Harry's lessons with Snape is that his best results come when he reflects the charm of the attacking wizard back on his attacker. He broke through Snape's defenses with a SHIELD charm. He wasn't trying to 'read' Snape, he was only trying to defend his own mind. That's what surprised Snape. The earlier stinging charm was an instinctive defense, Snape probably wouldn't have picked it himself but it was effective and Snape recognised it as such. It's the Shield charm that interested me. If Harry could break into a skilled Occlumens memories by reflecting 'legilimens' back onto him, it follows that he likely, albeit unknowinlgy, reflected Voldemort's AK in a similar manner. That may or may not have something to do with magical energy involving Lily's final sacrifice, but I believe we were handed a clue in that scene. Mel, still with too much time on her hands From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 16:50:23 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:50:23 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86069 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > Kneazy wrote: > > Oh, dear. > > As an enthusiastic afficianado of gore-splattered mayhem I am > under- > > whelmed, nay, distressed by the current outbreak of touchy-feely > > new age 'don't let's be nasty to Voldemort.' It seems that although > he > > and his enthusiastic band of supremacist murderers have slaughtered > > uncounted innocents over the years, all his sins will be wiped out > by > > the goodness in Harry's heart. Arrrgh! > > Me: > > Hehe, Kneazy: I never said Voldemort is not going to be destroyed! I > just don't think it will happen in a frenzy of hatred from > Harry; "Take that!" *splash* and "take this" *the breaking of bones* > and "serves you right" *splat; tearing out Voldemort's eyes*... This > is hard. I am not denying book 5-Harry seems to harbour a lot of > hatred in his heart (at the end of book five a lot of it is directed > against Snape). But you must admit the way Rowling writes, she opens > up for another way of defeating Voldemort than just doing it the > Voldemort way? There's too much talk and insinuations about that > mysterious force, the thing Harry has that Voldie hasn't. I'm leaning > more against Harry defeating Voldemort the way he "defeated" him in > MoM: Not cursing him with the AK, but overwhelming Lord Thingy with > his feelings for Sirius; resulting in Voldie having to flee the > scene. I am not saying harry will not be in a real fight with > Voldemort trying to use every spell there is (except the unforgivable > ones of course).I can imagine a figthing scene where Harry's magical > skills turn out to be inferior to Voldie's, and where Voldie is about > to finish him off. Then something unexpected happens like in the > graveyard or the MoM scene. That would be consistent with a Rowling's > plot. > > And by the way; New Age-philosophy is certainly NOT my thing :-) I > don't want to be put in that category. You know; the notions of love > and selfless, (non-violent) heroic sacrifice is also a Christian > thought... > > Berit You didn't mention me, Kneasy, but I think I'm the one who brought up the topic. In any case, I also have no interest in or connection with New Age or "touch-feely" theories. I simply think that the distinction between good and evil must be maintained and that Harry must not succumb to the temptation to kill or inflict pain for pleasure. He must not become Voldemort's pupil like Bellatrix. The Unforgiveable Curses are unforgiveable for a reason, and I can't see JKR changing the rules and allowing him and his friends to use them. He must find some other way to kill Voldemort, either by causing Voldemort's own spell to backfire, or, if you prefer, in a fair, heroic, by-the-rule fight using Godric Gryffindor's sword. Maybe that's the reason the sword was introduced in the first place. Carol, who also thinks that Fawkes the Phoenix will somehow be involved From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 17:18:51 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 17:18:51 -0000 Subject: Timeline for ages & events (updated yet again) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86070 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "hickengruendler" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Marci" > wrote: > > Check out new info added to timeline and see if you agree. Input > > appreciated. > > > > Marci (down with Lexicon) LOL > > > > > As for the timeline, it has been broadened a bit and is on the > web > > > and up for review. I hope you all can take a look and give some > > > input. I'd appreciate it. > > > > > > See it here: > > http://www.geocities.com/adulthpfanatics/HPtimeline.html > > Hi. :-) > > The part about Charlie's birth year can't be true. If he were born in > 1974, he would have entered Hogwarts in 1985 and would still have > been there when Harry came to Hogwarts in 1991. > > Hickengruendler Also, Severus Snape and MWPP are five or six years younger than Lucius Malfoy (JKR interview giving Snape's age in GoF) and about three years younger than Bellatrix, whom Sirius hadn't seen since he was Harry's age (15) until he saw her enter Azkaban (OoP 114, Am. ed.), which appears to mean that she left Hogwarts at the end of his fourth year (her seventh). She and the other members of the gang have all left Snape behind by the time of the prank in his and MWPP's fifth year. Carol From augustinapeach at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 18:03:58 2003 From: augustinapeach at yahoo.com (augustinapeach) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 18:03:58 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead./Greek Tragedy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86071 Forgive me if this rambles a bit . . . this is the sort of conversation I generally steer away from, but as it deals with a fantasy world. . . .( :-)) --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "artcase" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Robert Shaw" > wrote: Harry will feel guilty either way, but killing Voldemort will benefit more people. > > > Art here: Guilt used to be explained as a punishment from the gods. > Robert again: More generally, sometimes there are no good choices, only lesser evils, and failing to choose is itself a choice. Moral codes that can't cope with such dilemmas might work in a community of saints but are not robust enough for real life. Now AP: I agree with Robert. It's easy enough to make ethical/moral choices in hypothetical situations, but life is messy. Sometimes we find ourselves in situations where there IS no solution that doesn't require us to bend our nice, theoretical principles -- the proverbial "being between a rock and a hard place." Obviously, Harry is up against one of those situations -- no matter what route he chooses, there will be negative consequences. I think it is interesting that we had a preview of this situation in PoA, when Lupin and Sirius were ready to kill Peter and Harry stopped them. He didn't want Lupin and Sirius to become murderers (p. 376), yet because of that decision, five people (Bertha Jorkins, the old man Frank, Cedric, Crouch Sr., and Sirius -- am I missing anyone?) have since died. As Dumbledore tells Harry in PoA (p. 426), "The consequences of our actions are always so complicated, so diverse, that predicting the future is a very difficult business indeed. . . ." I guess my point is, Harry doesn't get the benefit of a happy ending in this situation. Now he has to decide what consequences he is able to live with -- and no matter what he chooses (IMO), guilt is going to be one of those consequences. > (snip)> > > > Art again: Relating this to Harry's position, even to defend his life (according to Greek tragedy) he cannot kill Voldemort without suffering the wrath the Furies. Dumbledore ideally would be in a position to defeat Voldemort and choses not to. Interesting. IF Harry is being set up as an agent of the Furies, he is still walking on the edge of a slippery sword. (snip) AP again: The prophecy tells us Dumbledore can't defeat Voldemort -- only Harry has the power to do that. Indeed, he is walking on the edge of a slippery sword, which I suppose is one reason Dumbledore kept this information from him for so long -- what a burden for a young boy to bear. Put off the guilt as long as you can. (BTW, why didn't Dumbledore tell Harry about the prophecy during the conversation I cited earlier from PoA? Seems like it would have been a great time. Oh, well, plot reasons, I suppose.) > Art again: Historical reference and western law aside, I am inclined to wonder how in a children's story you can accurately build this complex of an issue to fruition without alienating readers. I sincerely hope the model of a tragedy continues with questionable outcomes. But, I fear the rather new notion of "Love conquers all" may prevail. This is just conjecture on my part. AP again: Let's don't confuse a realistic "love conquers all" ending with a media model of a "love conquers all" ending in which everybody is happy and the whole Great Hall at Hogwarts erupts in applause for that plucky little Harry, who has suffered so much and now is free from trouble with the woman he loves at his side, ready to ride off into the sunset. I believe love can "conquer all" and still leave Harry with issues to work out. Augustina Peach From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Sat Nov 29 18:07:56 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 12:07:56 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] a prediction I've not yet read In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20031129160752.00a35690@pop3.xtra.co.nz> Message-ID: <000001c3b6a3$ba9a1350$e7e979a5@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 86072 >Allie wrote - > >At the end of PoA, Trelawney predicts the Dark Lord becoming "greater >and more terrible than ever he was."? Now, so far, we haven't seen >this, because other than his loyal supporters (and whomever they have >managed to Imperio) nobody else in the WW knew LV was back.? Okay, so >now they know. > >So my thought is, he needs to become greater and more terrible in a >hurry, since we only have 2 books left.? I think it will occur >throughout book 6 (do we know when it's coming out? :) )...? I think >book 6 will run something like book 5, with things just getting worse >and worse, but this time it's not just for Harry and Hogwarts, it's >for everyone.? I think at the END of book 6, *LV* (not crazy Bella) >will kill somebody *very important* to Harry - maybe he'll finally >get Dumbledore, but it had better not be Ron or Hermione - and this >will be Harry's impetus to devote all of his energy, in book 7, to >finding out a way to rid the WW of Voldemort once and for all.? And >maybe along his way he'll fulfill DD's dreams of a prejudice and >corruption free world. ;) > >Thoughts? Iggy here: I have a couple of thoughts here. Greater and More Terrible: Well, he now has the Dementors on his side, which didn't have in the first time. He also appears to have successfully recruited the giants, which I don't think were with him either. Both creatures are *highly* resistant to normal magic and even a single one would prove problematic for your average small group of wizards or witches, much less a squad of them on full attack. (And a mixed group of DEs, Giants, and Dementors working in unison would create devastation unheard of in even the first war. LV is just the kind of person to think of that... or whoever might be pulling his strings.) We also have the fact that he now has some of the aspects of the ancient magics that protect Harry, and the prophecy itself protects LV from anyone but Harry. I think that the person LV can kill, or control, that would cause the most havoc would be Cornelius Fudge. And can't you just see him casting the Imperius Curse upon Fudge's personal assistant, Percy, and using him as the assassin? Not only would the death of Fudge throw the Ministry into complete chaos until they find a new Minister, but it would also seriously damage the Order when it's revealed that Percy is the killer and has been sent to Azkaban. (A situation like that would also really cause Percy to re-evaluate his priorities and change his life when he gets out... either through being proven innocent, or through being broken out of prison.) This would also have the potential to cause problems at the school as well by having the administration of the Ministry requesting that Dumbledore become at least the interim Minister until one can be selected. He would have to then split his time between the school and the ministry in a time of war. Just my two centaurs worth Iggy McSnurd From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Sat Nov 29 18:27:34 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 12:27:34 -0600 Subject: We Death Eaters Message-ID: <000101c3b6a6$7900d570$e7e979a5@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 86073 Iggy here: A holiday filk I just did up, and one that I hope nobody else has done already. *grin* Hope you like it. Iggy McSnurd We Death Eaters (to the tune of _We Three Kings_) We Death Eaters are Voldemort's horde, Wielding wands, we follow our Lord, Town and village, we claim but not pillage, All to spread his Dark Word. Chorus: Oh Lord of wonders, Lord of night, Lord who wields the killing green light, Death evading, cruelly persuading, Others to fall to his might. Born a babe, with prophecy's claim, To defeat Our Lord again and again, We shall defeat him, thoroughly beat him, To save our Dark Lord and his name. Crucius Curse to offer have I, Avada Kedavra to make them die, Dumbledore's tower, we'll raze him from power, And raise Voldemort's rule on high. From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 18:40:15 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 18:40:15 -0000 Subject: It may be M.A.D. but it's mine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86074 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mt3t3l1" wrote: > > > Introducing my M.A.D. theory. Miss Arabella Dumbledore. > > > > > > > > It would make sense if she were Dumbledore's little sister. > Consider their names. We have Albus, Aberforth, and now Arabella. > Now, before you start posting about how weak that is, remember the > Lucius/Lupin connection Pippin came up with, and the missing "D" > child of the Weasley's. * And * Harry says she's a "mad old > lady." :o) (ss/ps pg 22 scholastic). > > > > > > > > So there you have it, do with it what you will, but be gentle, this > is my first theory. > > > > May I offer as an alternate theory, Arabella McGonagall? > > In SS Chapter 14 and PoA Chapter 13, McGonagall appears in a tartan > bathrobe/dressing gown. In OoP Chapter 1, Mrs. Figg appears in tartan > carpet slippers. > > Minerva was the Roman goddess of war. There are many possible > meanings for "ara" and "bella" but two are "altar" and "war." > > Just thought I'd throw that out there. > > 3T3 Carol: Although I'd like to subscribe to the Dumbledore's little sister theory, I think the tartan slippers and her approximate age do suggest a McGonagall connection instead. Also Arabella may somehow prove to be the nemesis of the other Bella, Bellatrix. Although "bella" in Arabella could suggest "beautiful," it clearly suggests "battle" or "war" in Bellatrix, which means roughly "woman who wages war" or "woman warrior." (The Lexicon points out that Bellatrix is also the Amazon star in Orion, making it an apt astronomical name for a Black.) I tend to think that "bella" also suggests battle in Arabella simply because it makes sense to use the same meaning in both names. (Doreen, according to my dictionary, means "serious." So maybe we can expect some "serious" magic "at an advanced age" (to loosely quote a JKR interview) from Arabella Doreen Figg, mistakenly brushed aside by the WW as a squib. I knew there was a reason for not revealing her maiden name, which I'm now firmly convinced is McGonagall. Carol From olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org Sat Nov 29 18:58:50 2003 From: olivier.fouquet+harry at m4x.org (olivierfouquet2000) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 18:58:50 -0000 Subject: Free!Lupin was TBAY: In the control room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86075 >Jenny watched Olivier's interaction with interest. Always a staunch >supporter of Lupin, she found the breaking free theme quite >intriguing. >Before Erin could answer Olivier, Jenny posed a question of her own. >"Do you truly feel that the only way for Lupin to become free is to >be cured of his illness? That is the last thing I think could ever >happen because it would cancel out one of JKR's biggest moral themes >throughout the books." >At Olivier's surprised look to this statement, Jenny explained, " >think about it, JKR finds every way she can to focus on intolerance - >pureblood vs. "mudbloods" (racism) and fear of infection by >werewolves (AIDS/other infectious conditions) being two big ones - >and you propose that Lupin's freedom is to be cured? That eliminates >the issue, it doesn't resolve it. More important would be for >Lupin's condition to not be a stigma, for him to be accepted in the >WW. For Lupin to be truly freed, he would need to receive the >recognition he deserves as a person in regard to his accomplishments >and have him be accepted despite his condition. >~RSFJenny~ "Oh, but I could not agree more !" says Olivier. "A Cured!Lupin would be very surprising, as it would negate the complexity of Lupin's character as well as the reflection on prejudices. Besides, it would not be a very satisfying end to the "breaking free plot" either, as it would mean the only way out for discriminated ones is to come back to normality. I am fully with you on that one. What I would expect is a Free!Lupin, that is a Remus Lupin who would be able to live a normal life despite his werewolf condition. That he almost achieved in his last years in Hogwarts, where him being a werewolf was more a source of pleasure than everything else. Sirius even wishes it is full-moon without Lupin reacting negatively. But as I have said, he was then betraying Dumbledore and endangering his fellow students. What I would like to see he's him reaching again such a satisfying state of mind without doing harm to anyone. JKR clearly indicates that he has not yet reached this state in OoP, has he is described to be even poorer than in PoA, mainly because of the anti-werewolf laws. If I may speculate, I could imagine a few satisfying outcomes for him. Harry could maybe become an animagus, thereby relating to him as did James, Sirius and Peter. Or Lupin's lycanthropy could play a positive role in the future. What I could imagine is Lupin defeating Bellatrix (or some other major DE) in werewolf form. And of course, if the defeat of Voldemort is accompanied by a radical change of ethics in the wizarding world, and for once you should support me on that one Pippin, Lupin might very well end occupying a respected place, such as Headmaster of Hogwarts or leader of the Order. >"As for Lupin leading the Order, I feel that Lupin would not find >opposition to that in the Order anyway, it is outside, in the WW, >that Lupin has no respect." "I think that would be true in OoP, but as the coming-back of Voldemort has been officially acknowledged, the Order may have contacts with the WW "civil society". Everyone knew that Dumbledore had been a most efficient fighter against Voldemort during the first war, so it is reasonable to assume that some members at least will reveal their allegiance to the Order. And should Dumbledore die, it is also reasonable to surmise that the new leader will make himself known. That could not be Snape, since he has to remain secret, nor McGonagall, as she would be most needed in Hogwarts, so it could be Arthur or Lupin. Guess what the members of FILK LOAD (Freed from Illness Lupin Kan Lead Order After Dumbledore's Demise) think ?" Olivier From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 19:54:29 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 19:54:29 -0000 Subject: . . .The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86076 Claire asked: > > 11) If pure bloods are so limited that they have to intermarry, > and > > Molly and Arthur are related to the Blacks, shouldn't some Weasley > > ancestor be on the family tree? Surely they couldn't all be "blood > > traitors". > > > > Marianne answered: > I think the tapestry leaves us with a lot of questions. If one > assumes that Slytherin is made up of mostly pure-bloods, then > shouldn't Snape's name have also been on the tapestry? You'd think > that name would have caught Harry's eye, as would the names Weasley > or Potter...Either we'll discover at a later time that these names > really are here and Harry just didn't notice, or this is one of the > many details we obsess over that is of no importance to JKR. Another point that no one has mentioned (to my knowledge) is that the chart traces the paternal (Black) side of the family, not the maternal side (even though Sirius's mother is the one who was most obsessed with genealogy). The Snape connection (which I think must exist given the intermarriages of purebloods) could be on her side. Sirius's mother and Severus's father would make a formidable pair of cousins. BTW, Snape Sr. was a Dark wizard if there ever was one, but he doesn't seem to have been a Death Eater. Any speculations about what happened to him? Carol From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Sat Nov 29 20:05:47 2003 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 09:05:47 +1300 Subject: Squibs verses Muggles Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130090451.024c1c10@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 86077 I have been wondering about this for a while. Just at what stage is a squib considered a muggle, or not. Then, I am reading SS, and come across this statement by Neville. Chapter 7, Page 93 ............... "Well my gran brought me up and she is a witch," said Neville, "but the family thought I was muggle for ages.................. Now why would he say that instead of Squib? Anyone? Tanya From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 20:19:05 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 20:19:05 -0000 Subject: A Traitor in Their Midst Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86078 Can anyone direct me to the interview in which JKR suggests that Harry or his side will be betrayed by someone Harry trusts? I did a search for both "traitor" and "betrayal" using the interview search engine and came up with nothing. Two related questions: 1)Is that interview the source of all the ESE! speculation? If not, what (aside from an incurable impulse to theorize) is that train of thought all about? and 2) Why does the traitor have to be a member of the Order? I really don't buy Dumbledore, McGonagall, Lupin, Snape, or Bill as ESE. Why not a member of Dumbledore's Army, if not (ugh) Cho, how about a Gryffindor? My candidate of the moment is Seamus, who believed the lies about Harry in the Daily Prophet. He would make a nice parallel to Peter Pettigrew, a trusted roommate who drifted to the wrong side through weakness. (Then again, his dad's a muggle, which would make his family, and Dean Thomas's, candidates for extermination by the DEs.) Or maybe Parvati Patil and Lavender Brown? Reactions or suggestions, anybody? Carol From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Sat Nov 29 20:33:27 2003 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 09:33:27 +1300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Traitor in Their Midst In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130093105.02499660@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 86079 At 20:19 29/11/2003 +0000, you wrote: Carol wrote >Can anyone direct me to the interview in which JKR suggests that Harry >or his side will be betrayed by someone Harry trusts? I did a search >for both "traitor" and "betrayal" using the interview search engine >and came up with nothing. > >Two related questions: > >1)Is that interview the source of all the ESE! speculation? If not, >what (aside from an incurable impulse to theorize) is that train of >thought all about? and > >2) Why does the traitor have to be a member of the Order? I really >don't buy Dumbledore, McGonagall, Lupin, Snape, or Bill as ESE. Why >not a member of Dumbledore's Army, if not (ugh) Cho, how about a >Gryffindor? My candidate of the moment is Seamus, who believed the >lies about Harry in the Daily Prophet. He would make a nice parallel >to Peter Pettigrew, a trusted roommate who drifted to the wrong side >through weakness. (Then again, his dad's a muggle, which would make >his family, and Dean Thomas's, candidates for extermination by the >DEs.) Or maybe Parvati Patil and Lavender Brown? > >Reactions or suggestions, anybody? > >Carol Tanya here. Sorry, can't help with any links, but heres my ideas. I feel that whoever it is will be in Harry's generation. The generation before already has it's traitor. Not really looked and figured out who could have a weakness of character like Peter though. Tanya From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 20:43:56 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 20:43:56 -0000 Subject: CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS - Chapter 6 - The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86080 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "huntergreen_3" wrote: > Claire wrote: > > 11) If pure bloods are so limited that they have to intermarry, > and > > Molly and Arthur are related to the Blacks, shouldn't some Weasley > > ancestor be on the family tree? Surely they couldn't all be "blood > > traitors". > > Marianne replied: > >>I think the tapestry leaves us with a lot of questions. If one > assumes that Slytherin is made up of mostly pure-bloods, then > shouldn't Snape's name have also been on the tapestry? You'd think > that name would have caught Harry's eye, as would the names Weasley > or Potter...Either we'll discover at a later time that these names > really are here and Harry just didn't notice, or this is one of the > many details we obsess over that is of no importance to JKR.<< > > HunterGreen: > Its exteremly curious that both Snape and Potter not in the tapestry. > I can almost understand the Snape thing (for some reason I have this > thought that his family is from a different WW 'circle', like out of > country or something--that could even been the cause of some of his > social problems), but its odd that the Potters aren't on there. > I can't see Sirius either not mentioning it or never noticing (he > probably looking *specifically* for a Potter relative at some point > as a teenager, I know I would if there was a chance I was [albeit > distantly] related to my best friend). If there was one I don't see > why he wouldn't make a point of mentioning it to Harry....unless > there's some reason for him NOT to. > > > -HunterGreen. Again, maybe the connection to both the Potters and the Snapes is through Sirius's mother's line, which wouldn't show up on a chart showing only the "Noble and Most Ancient House of Black"--his father's side of the family. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 21:00:30 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 21:00:30 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question (meaning of the name Luna) In-Reply-To: <3FC6615B.4060802@cantab.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86082 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Angel Moules wrote: > Laura: > > There must also be some meaning behind Luna's name, Luna meaning > the moon. I haven't quite had enough time to ponder about that, but > there is definitely a signifigance. Your thoughts???? <<< > > Angel adds: > Connotations of the moon - something silvery. I'm wondering if this is > part of Harry's Slytherin side coming out. The moon tends to change the landscape around it, bringing out the hollows of the landscape. > > The silvery glow is from the reflected light of the sun - without the > sun, there is no moonlight. This is also the connotation of 'Lunatic' > which she seems to play up to. The moon is also Lupin's boggart. Maybe Luna is more dangerous to Lupin than PP's silver hand? Carol From eloiseherisson at aol.com Sat Nov 29 21:10:15 2003 From: eloiseherisson at aol.com (eloiseherisson at aol.com) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:10:15 EST Subject: ADMIN: Now Me Message-ID: <6.1d32ce70.2cfa6537@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86083 Greetings from Hexquarters! Recently we have noticed a significant number of posters heading their replies 'now me:' As in: You quote Anymember's post, then reply - ******************************************************************** Now me: I don't think many people will die in Book Six. Just Hagrid. And Hermione. And Lupin. Maybe Snape will get killed when he's spying? And Malfoy might kill Hedwig to get at Harry. And Voldemort will kill one of the twins for throwing snowballs at him in PS. Uh, and maybe Dumbledore will die so that Harry has to face Voldemort by himself. Oh, that would mean Ron would have to die as well. ******************************************************************** This is beginning to give us headaches. You see, 'now me:' is fine until someone quotes you, and then heads *their* reply, 'now me:' ******************************************************************** Now me: > I don't think many people will die in Book Six. Just Hagrid. And > Hermione. And Lupin. Maybe Snape will get killed when he's spying? > And Malfoy might kill Hedwig to get at Harry. And Voldemort will > kill one of the twins for throwing snowballs at him in PS. Uh, and > maybe Dumbledore will die so that Harry has to face Voldemort by > himself. Oh, that would mean Ron would have to die as well. Now me: That would make for a really dramatic opening of Book Seven. Harry would be standing at the graveside, crying, with Dumbledore and Snape sobbing in the background. Oh, they'd be dead, wouldn't they? OK, Harry with the *ghosts* of Dumbledore and Snape in the background. ******************************************************************** We then have to work out whether it's 'now me:' or 'now me:' who's speaking. This can be confusing. Things are further complicated when a third person quotes both of you. ******************************************************************** >> Now me: >> I don't think many people will die in Book Six. Just Hagrid. And >> Hermione. And Lupin. Maybe Snape will get killed when he's spying? >> And Malfoy might kill Hedwig to get at Harry. And Voldemort will >> kill one of the twins for throwing snowballs at him in PS. Uh, and >> maybe Dumbledore will die so that Harry has to face Voldemort by >> himself. Oh, that would mean Ron would have to die as well. > Now me: > That would make for a really dramatic opening of Book Seven. Harry > would be standing at the graveside, crying, with Dumbledore and > Snape sobbing in the background. Oh, they'd be dead, wouldn't they? > OK, Harry with the *ghosts* of Dumbledore and Snape in the > background. Now me: So what will Book Seven be called? Harry Potter and the Hogwarts Mass Funeral? ******************************************************************** We then have to work out whether 'now me:' is replying to 'now me:', or whether it's actually 'now me:' replying to 'now me:' AND 'now me:'. Or, of course, it could be 'now me:' replying to 'now me:' who is replying to 'now me:', now (but not me). In the interests of reducing the consumption of headache potion among the administration team; could posters consider heading replies with their name?. This is not a requirement. No one will be sent a howler for heading a reply 'now me:'. But we'd be very grateful. ;-) Many thanks. The List Admin Team [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sat Nov 29 21:14:58 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:14:58 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Ask the Question (meaning of the name Luna) Message-ID: <6d.1db46f38.2cfa6652@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86084 In a message dated 11/29/2003 4:03:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Angel Moules wrote: > Laura: > > There must also be some meaning behind Luna's name, Luna meaning > the moon. I haven't quite had enough time to ponder about that, but > there is definitely a signifigance. Your thoughts???? <<< > > Angel adds: > Connotations of the moon - something silvery. I'm wondering if this is > part of Harry's Slytherin side coming out. The moon tends to change the landscape around it, bringing out the hollows of the landscape. > > The silvery glow is from the reflected light of the sun - without the > sun, there is no moonlight. This is also the connotation of 'Lunatic' > which she seems to play up to. The moon is also Lupin's boggart. Maybe Luna is more dangerous to Lupin than PP's silver hand? Sherrie here: The Moon is also the essence of the feminine principle, representing the Goddess in many traditions. Perhaps, like the Moon Goddess, JKR is indicating that Luna is "untouchable"? (Sorry, H/L shippers!) Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Sat Nov 29 21:23:06 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 15:23:06 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Squibs verses Muggles In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130090451.024c1c10@pop3.xtra.co.nz> Message-ID: <000001c3b6be$fee221e0$95eb79a5@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 86085 >From: Tanya > >I have been wondering about this for a while. Just at what stage is a >squib considered a Muggle, or not. > >Then, I am reading SS, and come across this statement by Neville. > >Chapter 7, Page 93 > >............... "Well my gran brought me up and she is a witch," said >Neville, "but the family thought I was Muggle for ages.................. > >Now why would he say that instead of Squib? > >Anyone? > >Tanya Iggy here: Well, for one thing, she might not have really come up with the concept of a Squib until the second book. Here's an associated question for you, and it's one I've been thinking about for the past couple of days: Does a Squib have the same life span as a Wizard/Witch, a Muggle, or somewhere in between? Iggy McSnurd From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 21:24:12 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 21:24:12 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: <4.3.2.7.2.20031128011328.0248e7b0@pop3.norton.antivirus> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86086 Troels wrote: > Q: How can two Muggles have a kid with magical powers? Also > how does the Ministry of Magic find out these kids have > powers? > A: It's the same as two black-haired people producing a redheaded > child. Sometimes these things just happen, and no one really > knows why! The Ministry of Magic doesn't find out which > children are magic. In Hogwarts there's a magical quill which > detects the birth of a magical child, and writes his or her > name down in a large parchment book. Every year Professor > McGonagall checks the book, and sends owls to the people who > are turning 11. Also there's the question of when squibs who marry muggles become indistinguishable from muggles. The genes for magic would still be there, waiting to surface in a future generation. Clearly Lily's muggle father (and I think Mark Evans's muggle father as well) had some recent squib ancestors who in turn must have had witch/wizard ancestors. Maybe, like the gene for red hair, the gene for magical powers is recessive and both parents have to have it for it to be passed on to the child. I don't think that's the case, though, since Lily's mother seems to have been an ordinary muggle. It's JKR's universe, I realize, so RW genetics may not apply. Carol From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Sat Nov 29 21:28:26 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 15:28:26 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: Now Me In-Reply-To: <6.1d32ce70.2cfa6537@aol.com> Message-ID: <000101c3b6bf$bd79a2e0$95eb79a5@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 86087 >This is not a requirement. No one will be sent a howler for >heading a reply 'now me:'. > >But we'd be very grateful. ;-) > >Many thanks. > >The List Admin Team > Iggy here: *grin* Why else do you think I section off everything I say with the header "Iggy here:" (tm.. all rights reserved.. etc...)? It not only makes it much easier for people to attribute what I say more clearly, but it also is a clearer indication of who's talking when _I_ say something within a letter. With the mix-ups people naturally make when they're in a hurry, making things as easy to identify and as clear as possible is the only smart thing to do... Just my two centaurs worth. Iggy McSnurd From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Sat Nov 29 21:27:07 2003 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 10:27:07 +1300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Squibs verses Muggles In-Reply-To: <000001c3b6be$fee221e0$95eb79a5@Einstein> References: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130090451.024c1c10@pop3.xtra.co.nz> Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130102326.024909c0@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 86088 At 15:23 29/11/2003 -0600, you wrote: >Iggy here: > >Well, for one thing, she might not have really come up with the concept >of a Squib until the second book. > > >Here's an associated question for you, and it's one I've been thinking >about for the past couple of days: > >Does a Squib have the same life span as a Wizard/Witch, a Muggle, or >somewhere in between? > > >Iggy McSnurd Tanya here. Ditto, lol, had the same thoughts. However, might be a way to hide it, I'm not sure. Another question back. In the WW are the wizards and witches required to be on the Muggle births, marriages and deaths lists as they live near Muggles. It would be very hard to hide a 150 year old if there were records for their birth date in the Muggle realm. Tanya. From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Sat Nov 29 21:33:53 2003 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:33:53 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Crouch, the son Voldy never had. Message-ID: <64A87584.603C7E55.4B073798@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86089 In a message dated 11/29/2003 3:54:56 AM Eastern Standard Time, CareALotsClouds writes: > Harry says 'You're mad'. And rightly so in my opinion. Am >I the only one that thinks that Voldy would actually be >offended if Crouch killed Harry? I thought Voldy might >punish him for it actually. How humiliating for him when he >couldnt kill Harry and then one of his Death Eaters just >comes along and kills him. I dont think Voldy would like >that. I know it doesn't matter and it has no effect on the >story whatsoever, apart from the fact that no Death Eater >would ever actually kill Harry because of this reasoning. Oryomai: I totally agree. This could be part of Crouch's complete and utter insanity. It reminds me of the movie "Dogma", when Azrael (Jason Lee) tells Loki and Bartelby (Matt Damon and Ben Affleck) that the Devil is angry at them for their presumption that they could succeed where he has failed so many times. I wonder if Voldemort knows that Crouch was going to kill Harry for him... Oryomai From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sat Nov 29 21:35:38 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:35:38 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Squibs verses Muggles Message-ID: <18c.230a1a55.2cfa6b2a@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86091 In a message dated 11/29/2003 4:33:49 PM Eastern Standard Time, swaine.t at xtra.co.nz writes: In the WW are the wizards and witches required to be on the Muggle births, marriages and deaths lists as they live near Muggles. It would be very hard to hide a 150 year old if there were records for their birth date in the Muggle realm. Sherrie here: There's always the Howard Families "Masquerade" method - pretend to die in one place, then show up with a new identity elsewhere... Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From swaine.t at xtra.co.nz Sat Nov 29 21:39:25 2003 From: swaine.t at xtra.co.nz (Tanya Swaine) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 10:39:25 +1300 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130103558.0249e5c0@pop3.xtra.co.nz> No: HPFGUIDX 86092 At 16:50 29/11/2003 +0000, you wrote: >Carol wrote > >You didn't mention me, Kneasy, but I think I'm the one who brought up >the topic. In any case, I also have no interest in or connection with >New Age or "touch-feely" theories. I simply think that the distinction >between good and evil must be maintained and that Harry must not >succumb to the temptation to kill or inflict pain for pleasure. He >must not become Voldemort's pupil like Bellatrix. The Unforgiveable >Curses are unforgiveable for a reason, and I can't see JKR changing >the rules and allowing him and his friends to use them. He must find >some other way to kill Voldemort, either by causing Voldemort's own >spell to backfire, or, if you prefer, in a fair, heroic, by-the-rule >fight using Godric Gryffindor's sword. Maybe that's the reason the >sword was introduced in the first place. > >Carol, who also thinks that Fawkes the Phoenix will somehow be involved Tanya here. That would be a great idea. Fair, by the rules. But hey, who can see LV playing fair, by the rules. Also, where would LV's wand be, would the sword have an advantage against it? Fawkes might be involved, Phoenix are known as snake killers, and due to rebirth attempts, LV has a lot of snake venom in him. Just ideas, lol. Tanya From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 21:51:17 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 21:51:17 -0000 Subject: Titled characters (WAS Voldemort's "lordship") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86093 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "cnorcombe" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > wrote: > > Also, as far as we know, Salazar Slytherin was not a lord. In fact, > > unless I'm forgetting someone, the only titled wizard in the series so > > far is another dead one, the Bloody Baron. And possibly Sir Cadogan, > > but he's only a knight. > > Hi All > Nearly Headless Nick has a title - Sir Nicholas. > Chris My apologies to Sir Nicholas for leaving him out. Another knight like Sir Cadogan. But knighthoods are not hereditary; they're bestowed on a person by the king or queen. Or maybe Sir Nicholas was a baronet rather than a knight, which would still make him a "Sir." But I still don't see any lords or other aristocrats in the WW, only gentry (except for the Bloody Baron, who's probably German or Austrian rather than British, if it matters). Carol From belijako at online.no Sat Nov 29 22:06:46 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 22:06:46 -0000 Subject: Twitchy, prowling Snape? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86094 Did anyone else notice how Rowling describes Snape in the pensieve scene? OoP p. 566 Bloomsbury: Quote: "Round-shouldered yet angular, he [Snape] walked in a twitchy manner that recalled a spider, and his oily hair was jumping about his face." The twitchy spidery thing really caught my eye. This is not at all how Rowling describes Snape's manner of walking as a grown-up. Whenever Harry sees him, Snape is either "gliding", or "sweeping", or "striding" or "walking swiftly". All these imply someone moving elegantly and with ease rather than clumsy or oddly. So why this twitchy description in the pensieve scene? What does a twitchy walk say about the person in question? The only other description of Snape's walk that might not fit in with the "elegant" is his "prowling" (PS p. 165 Bloomsbury). It says Harry recognised his prowling walk in the scene where Snape threatens Quirrell in the forest. I don't know if "prowling" goes into the "twitchy" category or not :-) But if Harry easily recognised Snape's prowling at the time, it follows that Snape usually walks in a prowling manner, or Harry would not have recognised him. Does that mean Snape usually moves around "striding in a prowling manner"? I'm confused .-) So, what to make of this? Is Snape's walk twitchy, or is it sweepingly elegant? It couldn't possibly be both? And what does it say about him as a person...? From helen at odegard.com Sat Nov 29 22:08:04 2003 From: helen at odegard.com (Helen R. Granberry) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 14:08:04 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Metamorphagi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c3b6c5$436f0e30$6401a8c0@helenw1> No: HPFGUIDX 86095 dc: UM, OK, I'm willing to expose my naivete in order to get some information.? I see no problem with fanfics taking forward a Metamorphmagus!Harry based on canon; you're certainly on target with the JKR-interruption-theory that something is important about it.? (Although didn't JKR say somewhere, and I absolutely can't source this, that Harry would not be a Metamorphmagus?) My question is, why is this theory frowned upon, and why is it frowned upon to further speculate (in the guise of fanfic, which I think is a variation on theoretic posts) on wandless magic Harry?? I know posters elsewhere and sometimes here can become very possessive about their interpretation of canon. Let's face it, they can become possessive of Harry himself.? So can you please explain to me, offline if it is inappropriate to the conversation here, um, just what is a Harry Stu, as in *cough* wandless magic *cough*, and who among us designates it so? dc Helen: Hi dc :) On fanfiction, and I'll go ahead and address it to the list because it has to do with both canon interpretation of Harry as well as fanfiction (which one could argue is also a canon interpretation of Harry in fictional form). And, I also want to address the JKR quote you are referring to. A 'Gary Stu' in fanfiction is the male equivalent of a 'Mary Sue' in fanfiction -- an original non-canon female character who is essentially an avatar for the writer of the fanfic. These Mary Sues have lots of special powers, save the day and make the heroes fall in love with them. A Gary Stu would be the male equivalent and 'Harry Stu' in the Harry Potter fanfiction world usually means a depiction of Harry where he is special, super powerful, often very handsome, etc. I would argue that Harry already is that in the canon. He *is* special. He already has special gifts. Lots of girls do find him attractive, even if Harry is mostly oblivious. Hence, my not having a real problem with 'Harry Stu' in fanfiction. The two fanfics I was referring to -- and both are wonderful stories -- are _Paradigm of Uncertainty_ (and sequels) by Lori and _Draco Dormiens_ (and sequels) by Cassandra Claire. In both of these stories, Harry is, well, extremely powerful and can do controlled magic without his wand. Fanfiction aside, there are a lot of people who don't want to see Harry be *too* special or *too* powerful in canon. I have seen this in discussions not related to fanfiction at all. Even using the fanfiction term 'Harry Stu' to describe Harry if he were to be the Heir of Gryffindor, a Metamorhmagus, do wandless magic, etc. The fact of the matter is -- Harry *is* special. I would never knock a theory for making Harry too special. He is the hero of the books. He is destined to defeat Voldemort. He is special and important, whether he is any of those other things or not. Now... as for the JKR quote you are talking about... she is very, very specific whereas the interviewer is not: SB: We?re going to take a few more questions, and um, the next one is will Harry ever turn into a shape-changer like his father? JKR: Animagus. No, Harry?s not in training to be an animagus, and if you?ve read book three, you won?t know ? um, that?s a wizard that?s very, very difficult to do. They learn to turn themselves into animals. No, Harry is not, Harry is going to be concentrated elsewhere, he?s not going to have time to do that. He?s got quite a full agenda coming up, poor boy. She doesn't say 'no, he won't be a shape changer'. She says 'Animagus. No..." Becoming an Animagus *is* a very difficult thing to do. However, if Harry is a Metamorphmagus, he simply is one. He may need direction in terms of learning to use the skill, but 'Metamorphmagi are born, not made'. Personally, I think that particular quote supports Harry being a Metamorphmagus because of the way she corrects the interviewer and makes it very clear what she is saying no to. She doesn't say 'no, he's not going to be a shape shifter' she says 'Animagus' (what James does). Helen, who really, really thinks Harry is a Metamorphmagus in canon :) From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk Sat Nov 29 22:11:54 2003 From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 22:11:54 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86096 Carol wrote: > Clearly Lily's > muggle father (and I think Mark Evans's muggle father as well) had > some recent squib ancestors who in turn must have had witch/wizard > ancestors. > Lily's mother seems to have been an ordinary muggle. Pip!Squeak: Not clear to me. Firstly, there is no evidence apart from a coincidence of surnames that Mark Evans is related to Harry Potter. My local phonebook has an entire large page of Evans's. It's a very common surname. Secondly, if magic is due to a recessive gene (rather than a dominant gene), *both* of Lily's parents must have carried the gene. There is no need for any magical ancestor to be 'recent' - there could be no magic in Lily's ancestry since 'time immemorial' (i.e. before 1189, which is the official 'we give up' point in England). If it's a recessive gene, it will never show until it finally finds its genetic partner. Thirdly - 'Mark Evans'. Hmm... Harry has a 'mark' on his forehead, his mother was an 'Evans'. Dudley, in beating up 'Mark Evans', is beating up 'Harry Potter'. Who he can't touch, because he has that pesky magic power. So I'm not sure 'Mark Evans' will be appearing at Hogwarts. He may just be one of those JKR name clues - Mark Evans = Harry Potter. Dudley still wants to beat up Harry. Pip!Squeak From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 22:11:56 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 22:11:56 -0000 Subject: Snape and Lucius Malfoy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86097 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tania Canedo" wrote: > Actually, I think Snape went to Voldy on his own, DD has talked > about how much Snivellus loved the Dark Arts (which was also stated > by Sirius & Lupin), so I think that he was thrilled with Voldy's > ideas so he joined alone. He also speaks of hatred of "mud-bloods". > > Probably when he realized what Voldy's true intentions were he > thought of backing out, but was afraid that he might get the same > doom as Sirius' brother, so, probably that's why he became "double > agent" > > About Malfoy and Snape, I think that they just became friends, > but not quite as you say that he admired the other... Specially of > what Umbridge said, that Lucius always speaks highly of him, that's > what got me thinking that probably they where just friends, not > worshiper and worshipee... > > Tania Tania, I'm not sure whose post you're responding to since you didn't quote from it. I don't think it's mine, though I've tossed out some thoughts on the Snape/Malfoy relationship. It's important to note the five or six year difference in their ages, so that when Malfoy first noticed little Severus, he (Lucius) would have been sixteen or seventeen. Also I think there's a distinct difference in social class; pure blood or not (and I think he is), Snape doesn't appear to come from a rich family. So any attention Lucius Malfoy paid to the talented and unpopular little boy would have had a heavy element of condescension in it. I do think, as I've said elsewhere, that Lucius introduced the teenage Severus to the DEs by suggesting that here, at last, he'd receive some recognition. I do think that Regulus's murder may have been a factor in Snape's decision to turn against Voldemort since it occurred right around the time of Harry's birth and Snape started to spy for Dumbledore about a year before the Potters were murdered, but I don't think it alone would have convinced him. I think Voldemort revealed his intention to go after the Potters (not specifically Harry since this was before the prophecy) and Snape because of his life debt to James had to try to prevent that from happening. Just speculation, I know. But I don't think we can ignore the influence of the older Slytherins, "almost all of whom became Death Eaters," in influencing young Snape to join the DEs. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 22:25:33 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 22:25:33 -0000 Subject: Metamorphagi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86098 -ninammie wrote: > But if Harry isn't a metamorphmagus, then its importance must lie > elsewhere. Perhaps Tonks will have a much larger role in books 6 and > 7. Or perhaps another character whom we never suspected (Hermione? > Luna? Goyle? Who knows!) will turn out to have this amazing ability. I'm sure you're right that Harry is not a metamorphagus any more than he'll become an animagus like his father (JKR's remark that he won't have time to learn transfiguration on that level seems to apply here, too, especially since he doesn't seem to have any natural aptitude beyond growing back his hair). And why would JKR need another metamorphagus when she already has Tonks, who will surely have a larger (and I hope more interesting) role in future books? I'd like to see her turn into Bellatrix, myself--with the real Bellatrix properly stunned and tied to prevent her escape. A little memory modification courtesy of Mad Eye Moody would probably be necessary if they decided to let her go. Carol From belijako at online.no Sat Nov 29 22:40:13 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 22:40:13 -0000 Subject: The MoM ceiling and its symbols Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86099 I don't know if this has been brought up already, but I couldn't find anything searching the archives. When Harry visits the MoM for his hearing, Rowling describes the MoM in some detail. Among other things we get to know what the ceiling in the splendid hall looks like. Quote: "The peacock blue ceiling was inlaind with gleaming golden symbols that kept moving and changing like some enormous heavenly notice board." (OoP p. 117 Bloomsbury) Then, we meet the MoM ceiling again when Harry comes back for Sirius at the end of the book. Quote: "The light was dimmer than it had been by day; there were no fires burning under the mantelpieces set into the walls, but as the lift slid smoothly to a halt he [Harry] saw that golden symbols continued to twist sinuously in the dark blue ceiling." (OoP p. 678 Bloomsbury) It doesn't say what these golden symbols are. But in OoP, Hermione is studying runes, so I think it's possible that the symbols might be runes, and that they will come into the next books in some way or another (and Hermione's skill and knowledge will prove valuable :-). What I find interesting is that the peacock blue ceiling with its golden symbols are pictured on the cover of the OoP book (Bloomsbury), together with Fawkes, the corridor and the golden fountain. Now; both Fawkes, the MoM corridor and the fountain have already come into play. The golden symbols haven't. Yet. I think the fact that they're considerd worthy of appearing on the book cover might be a clue that they will turn out to be important in the next books. What I find really curious is that these golden symbols also are present on the backcover of the first HP book (still Bloomsbury)!!! They're decorating Dumbledore's robe... And they're exactly the same type of symbols that are pictured at the back of the OoP book. Very curious... Another interesting "twist": In the first OoP reference, the symbols in the ceiling are described as "moving and changing". In the second reference the WAY they're moving are described as "twisting sinuously". Now, that's strange. English is not my mother-tongue, but wouldn't one use those words to describe the way a snake moves? Any ideas? From helen at odegard.com Sat Nov 29 22:46:31 2003 From: helen at odegard.com (Helen R. Granberry) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 14:46:31 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Metamorphagi In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000001c3b6ca$a2a18810$6401a8c0@helenw1> No: HPFGUIDX 86101 I'm sure you're right that Harry is not a metamorphagus any more than he'll become an animagus like his father (JKR's remark that he won't have time to learn transfiguration on that level seems to apply here, too, especially since he doesn't seem to have any natural aptitude beyond growing back his hair). And why would JKR need another metamorphagus when she already has Tonks, who will surely have a larger (and I hope more interesting) role in future books? I'd like to see her turn into Bellatrix, myself--with the real Bellatrix properly stunned and tied to prevent her escape. A little memory modification courtesy of Mad Eye Moody would probably be necessary if they decided to let her go. Carol Hi Carol, I would like for Tonks to have a larger, more interesting role in the books as well (and I think she will). I like the idea of her turning into Bellatrix -- that would be great. One thing to keep in mind here is that Harry has had no reason to change his looks EXCEPT for that one instance. A lot of people have used the argument that if Harry *is* a Metamorphmagus, why hasn't he made himself older/taller/have blue hair/etc. like Tonks does, and the answer is... he hasn't had a reason to even try. He didn't know there was a such thing as a Metamorphmagus until he met one. Tonks, growing up with wizarding parents, probably did, or at least had someone around her who would recognize any accidental shape shifting she did as Metamorphmagus ability. Why would she need another Metamorphmagus? Well, why would she need another Parselmouth? Or Animagus? I don't think this is a valid argument against, simply because we have seen too many instances of other supposedly 'special' or 'rare' abilities. Now, regarding time, here is what she says: SB: We're going to take a few more questions, and um, the next one is will Harry ever turn into a shape-changer like his father? JKR: Animagus. No, Harry's not in training to be an animagus, and if you've read book three, you won't know - um, that's a wizard that's very, very difficult to do. They learn to turn themselves into animals. No, Harry is not, Harry is going to be concentrated elsewhere, he's not going to have time to do that. He's got quite a full agenda coming up, poor boy.." She says his time will be concentrated elsewhere (not on becoming an Animagus *specifically*) and that he has a full agenda coming up. That agenda may include learning to hone Metamorpmagus skills, just like that agenda includes Occlumency lessons with Snape and studying for his OWLs. Also, again, the Interviewer asks if Harry will become a 'shape changer'. JKR corrects him before saying no. THAT is what I find most telling about that quote. Helen, who is more attached to her theories than her ships ;) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 22:53:14 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 22:53:14 -0000 Subject: Traitor yet again (Was: Third Man in the Graveyard?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86102 melclaros wrote: > > Like: > Is it Severus's "Fault" that James and Lily Potter were targeted by > Voldemort in the First Place? WHAT did he tell Voldemort? Did > Snape "start it all"? > > Imagine the absolute horror and uncontrollable rage Harry would feel > upon learning that his hated potions master was instrumental in his > parents' murder. Carol: That can't be it. I think he somehow found out about Voldemort's plans and went not the other way around. There's no way that Dumbledore would have hired Snape as a teacher knowing that Harry would be his student if Snape were responsible for his parents' deaths. Also, he went over to Dumbledore about a year before the Potters were killed. The life debt, remember? He must have been trying to protect them and failed. Harry doesn't trust Snape, but Dumbledore does. And that trust has to be fully merited IMO. Carol, who is sorry this isn't a particularly articulate post From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Sat Nov 29 23:27:39 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 17:27:39 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Squibs verses Muggles In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130102326.024909c0@pop3.xtra.co.nz> Message-ID: <000001c3b6d0$64f66cf0$2e95aec7@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 86103 >Tanya here. > >Another question back.? In the WW are the wizards and witches >required to be on the Muggle births, marriages and deaths lists as they >live near Muggles.? It would be very hard to hide a 150 year old if there >were records for their birth date in the Muggle realm. Iggy here: I would think that they still have to register, but that there's a small task force that is assigned to get into these records and enchant the birth certificates so that it just doesn't register on the Muggles that anything's odd when they look at it. And since most people in the WW don't drive cars, and those who do probably have modified IDs, then it tends to keep people hidden well enough. This task force is probably similar to the Muggle Relations Department (or whatever it would be in the MoM...) There's also the fact that most people in the WW who aren't delivered by a midwife are probably delivered at some place like St. Mungos, so the special task force that deals with Muggle birth certificates probably only needs to alter the ones of wizards and witches born into Muggle families. Just another two centaurs worth. Iggy McSnurd From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 23:31:43 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 23:31:43 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130103558.0249e5c0@pop3.xtra.co.nz> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86104 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Tanya Swaine wrote: > At 16:50 29/11/2003 +0000, you wrote: > > >Carol wrote > > > >You didn't mention me, Kneasy, but I think I'm the one who brought up > >the topic. In any case, I also have no interest in or connection with > >New Age or "touch-feely" theories. I simply think that the distinction > >between good and evil must be maintained and that Harry must not > >succumb to the temptation to kill or inflict pain for pleasure. He > >must not become Voldemort's pupil like Bellatrix. The Unforgiveable > >Curses are unforgiveable for a reason, and I can't see JKR changing > >the rules and allowing him and his friends to use them. He must find > >some other way to kill Voldemort, either by causing Voldemort's own > >spell to backfire, or, if you prefer, in a fair, heroic, by-the-rule > >fight using Godric Gryffindor's sword. Maybe that's the reason the > >sword was introduced in the first place. > > > >Carol, who also thinks that Fawkes the Phoenix will somehow be involved > > > Tanya here. > > That would be a great idea. Fair, by the rules. > > But hey, who can see LV playing fair, by the rules. Also, where would LV's > wand be, would the sword have an advantage against it? Fawkes might be > involved, Phoenix are known as snake killers, and due to rebirth attempts, > LV has a lot of snake venom in him. > > Just ideas, lol. > > Tanya Which reminds me of dear Nagini. I wonder if there's a (legal and forgiveable) curse for killing a snake? It would be interesting to see someone (maybe Snape) kill her. The laws and rules against killing humans wouldn't apply--as they would to Voldemort, who was born human and does not fit any of the categories of Beasts and Beings in the WW. I'll get back to this when I have time to quote canon. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 23:42:56 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 23:42:56 -0000 Subject: Twitchy, prowling Snape? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86105 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > Did anyone else notice how Rowling describes Snape in the pensieve > scene? OoP p. 566 Bloomsbury: > > Quote: "Round-shouldered yet angular, he [Snape] walked in a twitchy > manner that recalled a spider, and his oily hair was jumping about > his face." > > The twitchy spidery thing really caught my eye. This is not at all > how Rowling describes Snape's manner of walking as a grown-up. > Whenever Harry sees him, Snape is either "gliding", or "sweeping", > or "striding" or "walking swiftly". All these imply someone moving > elegantly and with ease rather than clumsy or oddly. So why this > twitchy description in the pensieve scene? What does a twitchy walk > say about the person in question? > > The only other description of Snape's walk that might not fit in with > the "elegant" is his "prowling" (PS p. 165 Bloomsbury). It says Harry > recognised his prowling walk in the scene where Snape threatens > Quirrell in the forest. I don't know if "prowling" goes into > the "twitchy" category or not :-) But if Harry easily recognised > Snape's prowling at the time, it follows that Snape usually walks in > a prowling manner, or Harry would not have recognised him. Does that > mean Snape usually moves around "striding in a prowling manner"? I'm > confused .-) > > So, what to make of this? Is Snape's walk twitchy, or is it > sweepingly elegant? It couldn't possibly be both? And what does it > say about him as a person...? I think the "twitchy" walk was part of his awkward adolescence and that he either grew out of it or consciously overcame it. I don't think "prowling" is incompatible with gliding. Remember that Harry still thinks that Snape is sneaking around trying to get the stone for Voldemort in this scene. But the gliding of the adult Snape is not sneaking so much as one of the elements of his persona that gives him power over others, his students in particular. It goes along with his whispers or his sometimes silky voice. The neglected, abused boy has transformed himself to the best of his ability into someone that it would be foolish and dangerous to mess with. He doesn't torture his students like Umbridge; he cows them. And what he'll do to his real enemies when his powers are unleashed should be very interesting indeed. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 00:01:04 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 00:01:04 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86106 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" wrote: > Carol wrote: > > Clearly Lily's > > muggle father (and I think Mark Evans's muggle father as well) had > > some recent squib ancestors who in turn must have had witch/wizard > > ancestors. > > > Lily's mother seems to have been an ordinary muggle. > > > Pip!Squeak: > > Not clear to me. > > Firstly, there is no evidence apart from a coincidence of surnames > that Mark Evans is related to Harry Potter. My local phonebook has > an entire large page of Evans's. It's a very common surname. > Carol: We've already covered this topic and I've presented my reasons for thinking that the name Evans, Mark's age (the right age to go to Hogwarts next year), and his being in the same neighborhood as Harry all point to his being important in the next book--another muggle-born wizard who happens to be related to Harry and may even share his green eyes. I don't want to recycle old arguments but I can provide links if you want them. Pip Squeak: > Secondly, if magic is due to a recessive gene (rather than a > dominant gene), *both* of Lily's parents must have carried the > gene. > Carol: Exactly. If you read my post again, you'll see that I rejected this theory and concluded that wizard genetics may work differently from genetics in the RW. If Mark turns out to be a muggle-born wizard distantly related to Harry on his mother's side, we'll know that the magic comes through the Evans (paternal) line for both of them. That suggests that any squibs are in that line and that the female line is "pure" muggle (any squibs were so far back that they've been forgotten). It's possible that muggle-born wizards appear when TWO lines of squibs-turned muggle join and produce children. But it seems like too much of a coincidence that both Lily's parents and Mark's parents would produce such children. So I'm back to my theory of a squib great grandfather for Lily being the squib great great grandfather for Mark--and the recessive gene theory wouldn't explain that so I rejected it. BTW, my great great (ad infinitum) grandmother, Martha Carrier, was hanged at the Salem Witch Trials. I'm pretty sure, nonetheless, that I'm a muggle, not a squib or a muggle-born witch who hasn't yet discovered her powers. Butf anyone wants to credit the occasional madness in my posts to my genetic heritage from old Martha, you have my blessing. ;-) Carol From andie at knownet.net Sun Nov 30 00:25:02 2003 From: andie at knownet.net (grindieloe) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 00:25:02 -0000 Subject: New Clues Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86107 After reading New Clues to Harry Potter - Book 5, by the Wizarding World Press, I don't know where to being to get everyone's opinions on some of these new "clues." So, I guess I'll start with a few things about Chapter One. 1. QUOTE from NEW CLUES: "The way book 5 begins has a bit of a deja vu feel to it. Plus, it somehow flows with the way the book ends. HP Sleuths who are of the more daring type when it comes to literature may want to take a short cruise through Finnegan's Wake, by James Joyce. (Note: we wouldn't pretend to imply that anyone should attempt to read it all the way through - unless you happen to be a Buckley- style linguist.) Another work you may find reminiscent of the theme of the begining of book 5 is Paradise Lost, by John Milton." Any ideas here? I'm not really sure what this could mean. 2 .QUOTE FROM OOP: "Mrs Figg tottered along in front of them, peering anxiously around the corner. 'Keep your wand out,' she told Harry, as they entered Wisteria Walk. 'Never mind the Statute of Secrecy now, there's going to be hell to pay anyway, we might as well be hanged for a dragon as an egg. Talk about the Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery ... this was exactly what Dumbledore was afraid of - What's that at the end of the street? Oh, it's just Mr Prentice ... don't put your wand away, boy, don't I keep telling you I'm no use?' QUOTE from NEW CLUES: "For being late at night, there was certainly a lot of activity in Magnolia Crescent... like something down the street shortly after the Dementer attack. Was it something important? No it was just... " They must be referring to this Mr. Prentice. Could he simply be a muggle neighbor who happens to be out for a walk? Could he be a wizard? A squib? Could he be another of Mrs. Figg's cats? I guess there must be something to this Mr. Prentice, but I don't remember ever hearing about him before. 3. NEW CLUES also suggests the way Harry is poking fun at Dudley has significance. He does use a bit of baby talk, does he not? The other person who uses baby talk in OoP is none other than Voldie's #1 Mistress - Bella! Hmmm... Can't wait to hear your thoughts! :) grindieloe From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 00:25:22 2003 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 00:25:22 -0000 Subject: MWPP in Gryffindor (was: House Choice doesn't Equal Personality for Life In-Reply-To: <001001c3ad26$e39cc350$a8614242@bumbargefsmy9w> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86108 > Joj: > > I personally think MWPP were all in Slytherin. I like to imagine us finding this out when Harry asks Lupin point blank if they were. JKR wouldn't have been so careful to not say they were in Gryffindor, if she was going to make it that way. Why be so careful in all 5 books and all interviews, to never say what houses they were in, to do the obvious? It's not her style. > My reply: I believe we do have evidence that James Potter was in Gryffindor. In the movie (I'll tie this to the book in a minute.), Hermione shows Harry a Quidditch trophy with his dad's name on it. The trophy has Gryffindor on it, plain as day, along with McGonagall's name. Now, we know that JK Rowling had some say in the movies because all the books obviously haven't been finished yet and the filmmakers need to get important details right or it won't fit with future books and movies based on those books. So, while JKR obviously didn't object to turning James Potter the Chaser (in the book) into a Seeker (in the film), I imagine she would have objected a great deal if they'd put James in Gryffindor when he was actually in another house. Because if James wasn't in Gryffindor, then that strikes me as extremely important detail for Harry to find out later. And if JKR was being extremely careful to NOT confirm what house MWPP were all in, then I can't see her letting that revealing detail in the movie go by unchallenged. As for whether Lupin, Black and Pettigrew were all in Gryffindor with James, it stands to reason that they would be. I'll explain. We know that all the students have lessons with members of their own house, as well as spend leisure time together in their shared common rooms. Sometimes two houses have classes together, but this doesn't change my reasoning about MWPP all being Gryffindor. James and Sirius were rarely out of each other's company, according to McGonagall, Rosmerta and Flitwick in the Leaky Cauldron in PoA, so they would more than likely be in the same house. Otherwise, between lessons and Quidditch practice and games, James and Sirius wouldn't have much time to spend together in places where the professors could see them without them getting into trouble (such as when all students are supposed to be in their common rooms, not roaming around the castle). Using the trio as an example, Harry usually has so much homework to do and so many Quidditch practices to attend that his leisure time is spent in the Gryffindor common room or out on the Quidditch pitch with his fellow team members. Hermione and Ron rarely leave Harry's side, not only because they are great friends, but because they have lessons together and spend leisure time in the common room together. To me, it doesn't seem unlikely at all for the same scenario to have sprung up amongst MWPP. As for Lupin, I couldn't see anyone less likely to be in Slytherin than him. I do believe he was in Gryffindor as well because he was part of James and Sirius' little clique. Look at it this way, there doesn't seem to be a lot of cross-over close friendships between houses, not as portrayed in all five books books so far. Slytherins hang around with Slytherins, Ravenclaws hang around with Ravenclaws, Hufflepuffs hang around with Hufflepuffs, and Gryffindors hang around with Gryffindors. I can't imagined that's changed a great deal in the only 20 years since MWPP went to Hogwarts. Don't get me wrong, there are friendships between houses, such as Justin Finch-Fletchley, Ernie MacMillan, Hannah Abbott are friends with the trio, but they are surface friendships, not close friendships. I can't see Lupin, Sirious and James forming such tight bonds if they were in different houses than each other. Dating between houses seems quite common though, just judging by Harry & Cho, Ginny & Michael Corner, Percy & Penelope, etc. I firmly believe that Pettigrew was also in Gryffindor along with MPP because of several comments made by McGonagall, Serius and Lupin about how Pettigrew followed MPP around constantly and was considered a part of their clique. Cliques do seem to divide along house lines. After all, there is a lot of rivalry between houses, including Quiddtich matches (of which James as Chaser would have been acutely aware of), the points system with the awarding of the House cup at the end of the year to the House with the most points and the fact that the professors themselves seem to emphasize and even encourage the house rivalries. I can't find the first book or I'd scour it for clues that MWPP were in Gryffindor. I will look through the other books, though and see if can get some canonical quotes to backup my beliefs that MWPP were all in Gryffindor. Diana L. From tcyhunt at earthlink.net Sun Nov 30 00:42:35 2003 From: tcyhunt at earthlink.net (Tracy Hunt) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 00:42:35 -0000 Subject: A Traitor in Their Midst In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86109 wrote: > Can anyone direct me to the interview in which JKR suggests that Harry > or his side will be betrayed by someone Harry trusts? I did a search > for both "traitor" and "betrayal" using the interview search engine > and came up with nothing. > > Two related questions: > > 1)Is that interview the source of all the ESE! speculation? If not, > what (aside from an incurable impulse to theorize) is that train of > thought all about? and > > 2) Why does the traitor have to be a member of the Order? I really > don't buy Dumbledore, McGonagall, Lupin, Snape, or Bill as ESE. Why > not a member of Dumbledore's Army, if not (ugh) Cho, how about a > Gryffindor? My candidate of the moment is Seamus, who believed the > lies about Harry in the Daily Prophet. He would make a nice parallel > to Peter Pettigrew, a trusted roommate who drifted to the wrong side > through weakness. (Then again, his dad's a muggle, which would make > his family, and Dean Thomas's, candidates for extermination by the > DEs.) Or maybe Parvati Patil and Lavender Brown? > > Reactions or suggestions, anybody? > > Carol now Tcy: Carol, I'm not sure of the interview...but the start of the ESE! Lupin on this site can be blamed...um, I mean attributed to Pippin. I believe the start of it was post Pippin's post #39562. In this post, she posited that Lupin was ESE from his first scene (he gave the Trio tainted chocolate). You can search the archives, though it takes a while. Some of the other posts you might find interesting are: 39952, 51925, 51990, 52129, and 57900. You can also find links to many good posts at: http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/mysteries.html (under Magical Creatures - about 1/3 of the way down the page) Hope that helps a little...good luck! Tcy From pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no Sun Nov 30 01:19:00 2003 From: pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no (pengolodh_sc) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 01:19:00 -0000 Subject: Titled characters (WAS Voldemort's "lordship") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86110 --- In HPforGrownups, Carol wrote: [snip] > Or maybe Sir Nicholas was a baronet rather than a knight, > which would still make him a "Sir." According to the cake in the Deathday-party in CoS, Sir Nicholas de Mimsy-Porpington died in 1492, 119 years before the first letters patent for baronets were drawn up (by King James I, as a means of raising funds for occupying Ulster - the title was granted upon payment of a fee of ? 1095, which was enough to maintain 30 infantrymen in Ulster for three years - later a similar system of baronetcies was introduced to pay for the settling of Nova Scotia). > But I still don't see any lords or other aristocrats in the WW, > only gentry (except for the Bloody Baron, who's probably German > or Austrian rather than British, if it matters). This made me curious - I do not recall ever seeing anything in the books pointing in any particular direction regarding the Bloody Baron's nationality, but I can easily have missed something. What in the books made you think he is German or Austrian? Best regards Christian Stub? From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk Sun Nov 30 01:31:07 2003 From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 01:31:07 -0000 Subject: Genetics, descent and Re: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86111 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" wrote: > > Carol wrote: > > > Clearly Lily's > > > muggle father (and I think Mark Evans's muggle father as well) > > > had some recent squib ancestors who in turn must have had > > > witch/wizardancestors. > > > > > Lily's mother seems to have been an ordinary muggle. > > > > > > Pip!Squeak: > > > > Not clear to me. > > > > Firstly, there is no evidence apart from a coincidence of > > surnames that Mark Evans is related to Harry Potter. My local > > phonebook has an entire large page of Evans's. It's a very > > common surname. > Carol: > We've already covered this topic and I've presented my reasons for > thinking that the name Evans, Mark's age (the right age to go to > Hogwarts next year), and his being in the same neighborhood as > Harry all point to his being important in the next book--another > muggle-born wizard who happens to be related to Harry and may even > share his green eyes. I don't want to recycle old arguments but I > can provide links if you want them. Pip!Squeak: Thank you, I've read them. As for 'we've covered this topic' - if you can repeat your arguments, I can repeat mine [grin]. Your theory is that Mark Evans is a distant cousin of Harry Potter. There is *no*, NO canon evidence that Mark Evans is in any way related to Harry Potter. Evan, for those who don't know, is the Welsh language form of John. The spelling 'Evan' dates from about the 15th Century - 'Ifan' is an alternate spelling. To say that because two people have the surname 'Evans' they are related is roughly as provable as arguing that two people called 'Johnson' are related. They might be. But they might well have no ancestry in common *at all* - the surname is derived from the ancestor's given name. The 'Evan' who gave his name to Mark's family line could well be a completely different person from the 'Evan' who gave his name to Lily's family line. > > Pip Squeak: > > Secondly, if magic is due to a recessive gene (rather than a > > dominant gene), *both* of Lily's parents must have carried the > > gene. > > > > Carol: > Exactly. If you read my post again, you'll see that I rejected this > theory and concluded that wizard genetics may work differently from > genetics in the RW. Pip!Squeak: No, you produced a circular argument. Carol: >Maybe, like the gene for red hair, the gene for magical >powers is recessive and both parents have to have it for it to be >passed on to the child. I don't think that's the case, though, since >Lily's mother seems to have been an ordinary muggle. It's JKR's >universe, I realize, so RW genetics may not apply. Pip!Squeak: I.E. you said - magic gene may be recessive. According to this theory, Lily's mother is a muggle, her father a squib-descendent. Therefore, magic genes can't be recessive. [Are you arguing that only squibs-and-their-descendents carry a magic gene?] Circular argument - you disprove the theory that magic is a recessive gene by stating that for your theory to work magic *can't* be a recessive gene. Again, there is no canon evidence that Grandfather Evans was a squib, or a descendent of squibs. There is evidence that they were proud of having a witch in the family - but opposed to that are many statements (Harry, Hagrid) that Lily's family are muggles. You don't have to be a squib to be proud of having a witch in the family. Lily had a special talent, which won her a place at an exclusive boarding school. Her parents were proud that she was 'special'. They'd probably have been equally proud if she'd turned out to be a musical genius. There's also the artistic argument. Make Harry's mother a descendent of wizards, you ruin the irony that Voldemort was defeated by a common muggle born. You also ruin the symmetry of Tom Riddle [Half- blood] and Harry Potter [Half-blood]. And the Trio's symmetry (pure, half and muggle blood). Personally, I don't think JKR is that sharp on actual genetics, (the poor woman has a French/Classics degree, not biology) but I think that her imagined magic inheritance is probably a recessive. She seems to think along those lines in her interview explanations. I agree that it may have some magical component, for example that witches and wizards are generally *only* attracted to muggles who carry one copy of the recessive gene. But 'recessive' broadly agrees with canon - squibs *must* be incredibly rare if every witch/wizard has two magic genes [they'd be the result of a bad copy of the gene]. Marrying a muggle born wizard/witch would still produce magic children (muggleborns have two magic genes just like pure bloods). Those who marry muggles with one magic gene(rather than muggle borns) have a fifty-fifty chance of producing magic children. Those who marry muggles with no magic gene would have no magic children - but we may be talking about the Uncle Vernons of the muggle world. No witch/wizard would dream of getting married to an Uncle Vernon. Further, a recessive mutation would mean that there would be genuine, no magical ancestors *at all* muggle borns out there. The original magic gene would have been a single genetic mutation in a single person. At some point, two of his/her descendents produced a child with two copies of the gene. And we have the first witch/wizard [shaman?]. But by the time that child with two copies was born, there were probably quite a few people out there with single copies. They are not magical, they have no magical ancestors, and they produce no magical children. Until a future descendent meets and has kids with someone who also has a single copy... Pip!Squeak From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 01:31:40 2003 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 01:31:40 -0000 Subject: Harry using the unforgivable curses (LOTR spoiler) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86112 If Harry ends up capable of performing the unforgivable curses, I would not be at all surprised. It seems to me that Harry's journey toward adulthood and his simultaneous journey toward fulfilling the prophecy and killing Voldemort has been all about learning to do the hard stuff, and I don't mean complicated spells and jinxes. He's had to stumble his way through performing amazing tasks and taken enormous risks with his own life as well as the lives of his friends. He's had to grow up in some ways extremely fast and accept danger when it was forced upon him, or even to seek it out when he felt there was cause to do so. He's even been willing to accept death several times when he thought all was lost (in CoS just after the basilisk poisoned him; in GoF when he was sure Voldemort was going to kill him, but he was determined to die standing up and still fighting; in OoP when Voldemort possessed him and he was in such pain he'd rather die than keep living). While Harry may have put off his homework many times or drug his feet on figuring out the egg clue in GoF, he always steps up the plate without hesitation when it's is turn to do so. Which is why I don't think he'll fail to learn the unforgivable curses, even if he does't actively practice them. If he needs the killing curse to defeat Voldemort, he will use it against him. If it's imperative that he use Imperio on someone, he will do so, even if he might feel guilty about it later. He will be capable of using the Crucio curse as well, but I can't see him using that without extreme provocation and complete lack of control on his part. It may happen as he's flown off the handle before, obviously. Whether or not Harry will use the killing curse to ultimately defeat Voldemort...no one knows except JKR and she's not telling. Personally, I agree with other posters who've said they can't see Harry using the avada kadavra curse to kill Voldemort. It's been mentioned several times in several of the books that Harry's ability to love (and love quite strongly) is his greatest strength. Harry's capacity for love is even mentioned in the prophecy as a "power the Dark Lord knows not". Harry's capacity for love MUST play a huge part in how Harry defeats Voldemort for good. And using the killing cures on someone, even scum like Voldemort, doesn't strike me as being an act full of love. (SPOILER ALERT IF YOU DON'T KNOW HOW LOTR ENDS!) Avert your eyes if you don't want to know! For example, look at The Lord of the Rings. Bilbo and Frodo both take pity on Gollum and spare Gollum's life. They felt compassion, empathy and pity for Gollum, but many around them couldn't understand why they didn't kill Gollum outright. At the end, when Frodo reaches Mt. Doom and decides to keep the ring for himself while Sam watches in horror, Gollum, the very creature Frodo had spared because of compassion, saves Frodo from the ring in the end. Sure, Frodo loses a finger and Gollum doesn't save him out of the goodness of his heart - but the results are undeniably the same. Diana L. From profwildflower at mindspring.com Sun Nov 30 01:50:25 2003 From: profwildflower at mindspring.com (whimsyflower) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 01:50:25 -0000 Subject: Ask the Question (The meaning of the name Luna) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86113 I've just finished reading "The Little White Horse" by Elizabeth Goudge. JKR has often said this was/is one of her favourite books from childhood. From reading that book, I have many thoughts about what Luna's name might mean. I agree with what Angel (post #85980), Carol (post #86082),and Sherrie (post #86084) have said so this post is just to add anotherperspective to theirs. On summary, the heroine of this story is Maria Merryweather, the Moon Princess, who is very "silvery." Together with Robin, she ended generations of feuding between the Night and the Day. I wonder about a possible parallel between this feuding and the feud 'Slytherin versus the Other Three Founders' or 'LV versus Everyone Else.' The family motto of the Merryweather Family was: "The brave soul and the pure spirit shall with a merry and a loving heart inherit the kingdom together." The mascot of the Merryweathers was a lion. I wonder if the brave Gryffindor Lion (Harry) and the silvery, pure spirit (Luna) will need to work together to heal the feud that infects the Wizarding World. Whimsy From laura_clapham2002 at yahoo.com.au Sat Nov 29 05:24:53 2003 From: laura_clapham2002 at yahoo.com.au (=?iso-8859-1?q?Laura=20Clapham?=) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 16:24:53 +1100 (EST) Subject: time travel revisited In-Reply-To: <1070067434.9559.32004.m18@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <20031129052453.22026.qmail@web14203.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86114 Hi Everybody! I have been lurking on this list for a long time now - and would like to say that this is an excellent list - although responsible for my thesis productivity slowing down to a crawling pace. I have read a lot of the theories on time travel posted a long time ago but still have trouble getting my head around the following. In POA, when HH go back in time three hours why do they end up in a slightly different place to where they were three hours ago? If they were really going back three hours wouldn't they appear virtually on top of their past selves? And what would happen if they arrived in a room where there were other people? Would this appear to be apparating? This in my mind also ties in to Hagrid's disappearance at the train station in PS - as I assume Hagrid never learnt enough magic to apparate, could he have used a time turner to disappear? I hope this post makes sense and hello to all the other laura's on the list! princesslaura --------------------------------- Yahoo! Personals - New people, new possibilities. FREE for a limited time! [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From Ariel141 at aol.com Sat Nov 29 06:44:11 2003 From: Ariel141 at aol.com (stargazer2681) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 06:44:11 -0000 Subject: More Neville Questions (was Neville's Evil Family) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86115 Hello Everyone, Although I've been reading these messages for a few weeks this is my first post. I know this topic has been addressed and I've enjoyed reading the theories and questions people have about Neville's family because I'm sure that there will be some pivotal information that will come out regarding this group. But I was recently re-reading POA and noticed a couple of possible interesting things regarding Neville that I overlooked first time around. Firstly, when Harry was boarding the Knight Bus and was asked his name by Stan he very quickly replied "Neville Longbottom". In hindsight, I thought that this could have been JKR's forshadowing of the prophecy, which was still, at that time, two books away. After all, there are many names that Harry could have chosen - it seemed important somehow that he did choose Neville's. Also, later in the book, when Harry is in his first divination class and Trelawney is making some of those seemingly insignificant predictions, one of them is to Neville when she asks him if his grandmother is well. Neville replies that he thinks so, and then Trelawney says that he shouldn't be so sure about that. There seems to be more to Neville's Gran than meets the eye. Any thoughts on this? "stargazer" From jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl Sun Nov 30 02:03:28 2003 From: jolka55 at poczta.onet.pl (Juleczka) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 02:03:28 -0000 Subject: Metamorphagi In-Reply-To: <1070067434.9559.32004.m18@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86116 Ninnamie wrote: But if Harry isn't a metamorphmagus, then its importance must lie elsewhere. Perhaps Tonks will have a much larger role in books 6 and 7. Or perhaps another character whom we never suspected (Hermione? Luna? Goyle? Who knows!) will turn out to have this amazing ability. Julia responds: I also think that in future books there will be a metamorphmagus. It's like with Polyjuice Potion. In CoS it's introduced to us. We learn about it and how it works. Than, in GoF the Polyjuice Potion play a huge role. IMO it's what JKR likes the best. Small hints in previous books which should lead us to the solution. Clever. I'm almost sure that in 6. or 7. book we will meet a new metamorphmagus (maybe a DADA teacher??) or Harry will turn out to be one. Helen wrote: Remember what Tonks says to Harry when he first meets her? Wizards can't just change their appearance at will. Unless they are Metamorphmagi, they must use complicated spells and potions. Harry doesn't need this to grow his hair back. While he does do other externally focused wandless magic, magical transfiguration on yourself is particularly difficult and potentially dangerous (note how long it took WPP to become Animagi and how often this idea of difficult self-transfiguration is re-enforced). Julia responds: I REALLY like your theory!! It seems that there is no other way but Harry turns out to be a metamorphmagus! I think it would be very important for a plot and this whole Voldemort-and-Harry-must-battle thing. Don't you think? It's really interesting why it hasn't turned out yet but... I, in fact, can't remember any situation in which Harry wishes he were someone else, looked different. Of course he's ALWAYS wanted to be someone else but he can't change the history...In a matter of fact, Harry hasn't anything against his appearance... Julia From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Sat Nov 29 21:21:55 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 21:21:55 +0000 Subject: [HPforGrownups] A Traitor in Their Midst In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130093105.02499660@pop3.xtra.co.nz> References: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130093105.02499660@pop3.xtra.co.nz> Message-ID: <3FC90DF3.8020806@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 86117 Carol: > Or maybe Parvati Patil and Lavender Brown? > > > >Reactions or suggestions, anybody? Tanya: > > Sorry, can't help with any links, but heres my ideas. I feel that whoever > it is will be in Harry's generation. The generation before already > has its traitor. Not really looked and figured out who could have a weakness of > character like Peter though. Angel: I have a theory that Lavender Brown is actually called Lavender Lestrange. There's a good reason that she's in Gryffindor, and I rather suspect that behind the the frippery there is rather more intelligence. Or maybe she's dizzy because of a memory charm, to make her forget who her parents really are. Rather like the way Bertha Jorkins forgot details, and seems rather dizzy. And does anyone know who Florence is? AotN From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 29 21:36:01 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 21:36:01 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Magical Robes? In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130090451.024c1c10@pop3.xtra.co.nz> Message-ID: <20031129213601.33957.qmail@web60002.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86118 Hello! Right, I am sorry if you have already discussed this or something, but I am currently reading the 5th book for the 6th time (I am sad like that) and there is something I just found weird. Well, you know when Harry has the dream about attacking Arthur? Then McGonagal comes in and tells him to come and see Dumbledore, he puts his dressing gown on and follows her. Well they go to Sirius's straight from there, stay up all night, have breakfast and go to bed. I recollect it saying that Harry sat up fully clothed forcing himself to stay awake, and then later they changed out of their robes into jeans. But if he was in his pyjamas why was he wearing his robes? They were all (Fred & George etc) in their pyjamas and if they were going to go to sleep they wouldn't change into robes to do that would they. It just doesn't make sense. Hopefully you can explain it. Thanks, Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jujudion10 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 21:37:26 2003 From: jujudion10 at yahoo.com (Juju) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 21:37:26 -0000 Subject: Snape Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86119 I realize now that I need to go back and re-read and pay closer attention next time, although I do have a theory about Snape. I think Snape was in love with Lily Potter when they went to school together. I think also that there will be much more revealed about him, he's one of the most complex and contradictory characters in my opinion, so much inner conflict. I find Snape to be utterly fascinating, yet I think the vampire theory too implausible. Another thing...I'm not convinced that Harry hasn't any living family members other than the Dursleys. I won't be surprised if we meet one soon, just a hunch. "Juju" From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 29 21:57:29 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 21:57:29 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Potters WAS CHAPTER DISCUSSION chapter 6 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031129215729.17825.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86120 Carol: "Again, maybe the connection to both the Potters and the Snapes is through Sirius's mother's line, which wouldn't show up on a chart showing only the "Noble and Most Ancient House of Black"--his father's side of the family." I don't know whether this is true or not. I mean we don't know anything about James's family really, except that both his parents are dead. I know this because, Harry was born when Lily and James were about 20 or something, and then they died one year later. When Harry was attacked (aka he got the scar) there were no living relatives except the Dursleys. This means Jameses parents are dead obviously. It also means they died within 6 years of each other, because Sirius quotes that when he ran away in his last year at Hogwarts, he stayed with Mr and Mrs Potter. It isn't unusual for couples to die with 6 years of each other, but i am thinking perhaps they could not have been that old. Okay, sothe average couple has children at 30, that would only make the Potters 50 when they died. Why would the suddenly die? IMO i think they were murdered by a Death Eater or Voldemort because they are Gryffindors heirs, and then it was James and Lily and they were killed and now its Harry and he will probably be killed too or he will kill Voldemort because Voldemort is Slytherins heir and he is Gryffindor - remember that Gryffindor and Slytherin couldnt live together either and Harry and Voldemort can't. Thanks, I welcome critisism. Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 29 22:16:40 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 22:16:40 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Squibs verses Muggles In-Reply-To: <000001c3b6be$fee221e0$95eb79a5@Einstein> Message-ID: <20031129221640.42749.qmail@web60002.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86121 >Does a Squib have the same life span as a Wizard/Witch, a Muggle, or >somewhere in between? Well a Squib is a non-magic person born to magic parents. So they are non-magic. Non-magic people are Muggles. A squib is just a type of muggle, so a Squib would only live an average of 76 years I think it is, whereas a wizard - I don't know, 150 years? Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 29 22:25:39 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 22:25:39 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re:Luna Lovegood WAS Ask the Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031129222539.15917.qmail@web60005.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86122 Carol: >The moon is also Lupin's boggart. Maybe Luna is more dangerous to >Lupin than PP's silver hand? Personally I don't think Luna is a bad character at all. We so far haven't seen any signs she is particulary clever - she is in Ravenclaw - and I am nearly 100% certain that she is going to have a large part to play soon. She isn't evil and neither is Lupin so they are on the same side. OKay, so people on the same side sometimes hurt each other, but no one will hurt Lupin and I doubt someone will hurt Luna. Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From jujudion10 at yahoo.com Sat Nov 29 22:29:02 2003 From: jujudion10 at yahoo.com (Juju) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 22:29:02 -0000 Subject: Legilimens and Occlumens and Snape's Reasons In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86123 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "artcase" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" > wrote: > > I think Snape was intentionally extracting painful memories from Harry > > so that Harry could get some idea of how Voldemort could use > > legilmency against him. > I disagree. Some schools of thought in dog training use shock > collars and negative response to get a dog to behave. Snape used > Harry's worst memories to trigger a reaction of aversion inside > Harry's head. Through this process, Snape was trying to make Harry > learn to put up mental walls to keep Snape from gloating over > Harry's memories. I don't believe that Snape hates Harry. I think Harry is just a constant painful reminder of things past for Snape (see my post about theory on Snape). Also, I truly believe we will see an important connection between the 2 of them in the future books. Juju From gbannister10 at aol.com Sat Nov 29 22:49:19 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 22:49:19 -0000 Subject: The MoM ceiling and its symbols In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86124 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" < Berit: > Another interesting "twist": In the first OoP reference, the symbols > in the ceiling are described as "moving and changing". In the second > reference the WAY they're moving are described as "twisting > sinuously". Now, that's strange. English is not my mother-tongue, but > wouldn't one use those words to describe the way a snake moves? > > Any ideas? Geoff: The basic definition of sinuous is "having many curves and turns". It is derived from Latin "sinus" - a curve - and is thus also related to the Maths terms sine and cosine. I would however agree that it usually makes me think of something snake-like. From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 29 23:06:37 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 23:06:37 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Crouch, the son Voldy never had. In-Reply-To: <64A87584.603C7E55.4B073798@aol.com> Message-ID: <20031129230637.22427.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86125 >Oryomai: >I totally agree. This could be part of Crouch's complete and utter >insanity. It reminds me of the movie "Dogma", when Azrael (Jason Lee) >tells Loki and Bartelby (Matt Damon and Ben Affleck) that the Devil is >angry at them for their presumption that they could succeed where he >has failed so many times. I wonder if Voldemort knows that Crouch >was going to kill Harry for him... Crouch was definitly insane. He reminds me a bit of Hitler in that aspect - he was crazy, crazy enough to take stupid ideas to the limit - but also sane enough to be able to twist people - Winky, his father, even, perhaps, Voldemort. Just an though. Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 29 23:12:10 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 23:12:10 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Squibs verses Muggles In-Reply-To: <5.0.2.1.2.20031130102326.024909c0@pop3.xtra.co.nz> Message-ID: <20031129231210.25551.qmail@web60005.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86126 >Tanya says: > In the WW are the wizards and witches >required to be on the Muggle births, marriages and deaths lists as they >live near Muggles. I think they probably would have too. I mean Harry undoubtably is isn't he, he grew up with the Dursleys and went to Muggle school. I would have thought Wizard children in Pure Blood families (Weasleys?) would go to Muggle School, to learn to read and write and such but clearly they didn't as they know very little about muggle life. Also, though, if Harry is registered as 'existing' then they would have to note down his school when they fill in the census (sorry can't spell) form every few years? That would cause problems I believe, so it might be safer not too. On the other hand, a muggle could inform the government of illegal immigrents if they aren't registered and get them arrested... I suppose they would use magic to get out of that one! Just a though, Jadeauxxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 29 23:46:33 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 23:46:33 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Titled characters (aka Sir Nick) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031129234633.95088.qmail@web60006.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86127 >Carol says: >But I still >don't see any lords or other aristocrats in the WW, only gentry So? It doesn't mean there aren't any. I mean, write that story in a muggle world, set in a muggle boarding school and with the muggle government. In the government there are no lords - also there are none in the MOM. Presumably Sir Nicholas was knighted by King Ethelred or whoever was king at the time in England when he was alive (sorry I can't remember) for doing something muggleishy worthy, then they guessed he was a 'witch' (was witch-burning aorund then? I thought it was Christian-burning) and cut his head off? Or is this out of date thinking about it? Surely beheading people didn't start this early on? Hanging was popular I suppose but as far as I know if the Saxons wanted you dead the would ... wait hang on, sorry about that. You could be: stoned, beheaded, hung, burnt, drowned or have your neck broken for being any of the following: a traitor, an outlaw, a witch, a wizard or a theif. So if Nick was one of these and a Knight? So he did something good and then some magic, or what? Please can someone enlighten me on the answer. Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 30 00:30:23 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 00:30:23 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Traitor yet again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031130003023.33182.qmail@web60004.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86128 Carol: >Harry doesn't trust Snape, but >Dumbledore does. And that trust has to be fully merited IMO. Okay Harry hates Snape. Why? Because Snape picks on him. Okay, that's cool, fair enough. Sirius says the world isn't split into nice people and Death Eaters. Snape isn't nice, but he's not evil, is he? He risked his life for the Order loads, from what I gather - all that spying. I think his trust is fully merited. IMHO, I think he has been doing better then any of the Maruauders. Pettigrew went evil, Black couldn't control his emotions and landed himself in jail, Potter died and Lupin... well we don't know anything about Lupin at all really, do we? Who is he really? Is he married? What does he do that he leaves the house for "long periods of time"? Until we have proof on that, I would say that Snape is a much better person than they. Okay so he's not as nice as they, maybe, but Black wasn't nice either, not to people he didn't like. Snape's the same. I think they must be related, it is so uncanny... Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From angelgava at hotmail.com Fri Nov 28 23:21:16 2003 From: angelgava at hotmail.com (angygarcia) Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 23:21:16 -0000 Subject: After Howarts Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86129 Here are my predictions for the future. Hermione ----work for the M. of Magic. Ron----------Proffesional Quiddich player Harry--------an Auror Neville------Teacher at Howarts "angygarcia" From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sat Nov 29 23:50:07 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 23:50:07 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Figg Theories In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031129235007.32831.qmail@web60005.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86130 Carol: >So maybe we can expect some "serious" magic "at an advanced >age" (to loosely quote a JKR interview) from Arabella Doreen Figg, >mistakenly brushed aside by the WW as a squib. I knew there was a >reason for not revealing her maiden name, which I'm now firmly >convinced is McGonagall. Hang on, I am just confused. Can you explain? I thought she was Miss Arabella Figg; therefore, Figg is her maiden name? Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 03:24:21 2003 From: dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com (dumbledore11214) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 03:24:21 -0000 Subject: Traitor yet again (Was: Third Man in the Graveyard?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86132 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > Carol: > That can't be it. I think he somehow found out about Voldemort's plans > and went not the other way around. There's no way that Dumbledore > would have hired Snape as a teacher knowing that Harry would be his > student if Snape were responsible for his parents' deaths. Also, he > went over to Dumbledore about a year before the Potters were killed. > The life debt, remember? He must have been trying to protect them and > failed. Harry doesn't trust Snape, but > Dumbledore does. And that trust has to be fully merited IMO. > > Carol, who is sorry this isn't a particularly articulate post This probably will not be the most articulate post either, but I agree with Mel. I think that is exactly how it happened. As to Dumbledore not hiring Snape as a teacher if this scenario was the right one - why? At the end OoP Dumbledore admitted to Harry that he regretted doing a great deal of things, maybe that will be another regret of his? I don't think Snape trying to pay life debt is mutually exclusive from him delivering the prophecy to Voldie on a silver plate. I can come up with quite a few reasons why . For example Snape may not have known that prohecy can be applied to Potters. Maybe he thought that it applies to Longbottoms only. As far as we know he does not owe any life debts to them. I think that it is safe to assume that at the time he served on Voldies' side, he committed quite a few atrocities, so he gets a lot of respect from me for finally making a right choice and trying to correct the mistakes he did. I would love if Snape was the one who started the chain of events. It would be very bangy in my opinion. As I mentioned to someone off- list, this would make a great confrontational scene between Snape and Harry, where I hope Harry will have a possibility to repay Severus for years of psychological abuse. Anything is possible after OoP, in my opinion. Snape may turn out to be harry's saviour at the end, he also may turn out to be the ultimate betrayer, which I hope is not going to happen. Alla From dcyasser at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 03:47:07 2003 From: dcyasser at yahoo.com (dcyasser) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 03:47:07 -0000 Subject: Metamorphagi In-Reply-To: <000001c3b6c5$436f0e30$6401a8c0@helenw1> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86133 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Helen R. Granberry" wrote: > > On fanfiction, and I'll go ahead and address it to the list because it has to do with both canon interpretation of Harry as well as fanfiction (which one could argue is also a canon interpretation of Harry in fictional form). Hear, hear. >'Harry Stu' in the Harry Potter fanfiction world usually means a depiction of Harry where he is special, super powerful, often very handsome, etc. > > Fanfiction aside, there are a lot of people who don't want to see Harry be *too* special or *too* powerful in canon. I have seen > this in discussions not related to fanfiction at all. > Even using the fanfiction term 'Harry Stu' to describe Harry if he were to be the Heir of Gryffindor, a Metamorhmagus, do wandless magic, etc. The fact of the matter is -- Harry *is* special. I would never knock a theory for making Harry too special. He is the hero of the books. He is destined to defeat Voldemort. He is special and important, whether he is any of those other things or not. > > Now... as for the JKR quote you are talking about... she is very, very specific whereas the interviewer is not: > > SB: We're going to take a few more questions, and um, the next one is will Harry ever turn into a shape-changer like his father? > > JKR: Animagus. No, Harry's not in training to be an animagus... > She doesn't say 'no, he won't be a shape changer'. She says 'Animagus. > No..." Becoming an Animagus *is* a very difficult thing to do. However,if Harry is a Metamorphmagus, he simply is one. He may need direction in terms of learning to use the skill, but 'Metamorphmagi are born, not made'. > > Personally, I think that particular quote supports Harry being a > Metamorphmagus because of the way she corrects the interviewer and makes it very clear what she is saying no to. She doesn't say 'no, he's not going to be a shape shifter' she says 'Animagus' (what James does). > Helen, who really, really thinks Harry is a Metamorphmagus in canon :) Hi Helen Thanks for the input, and for finding the JKR quote. (I do apologize for snipping the end of it off, but I think I kept your point and my, this was getting long.) For my part,I like to keep as many doors open for Harry and Co. as canon allows. I mean, that's what makes this all fun, right? So I'll see your Metamorphmagus and raise you a wandless magic. The beauty of these books (and good literature in general) is reading it the way you want to, gleaning the meaning that suits you, picking your traitor and sticking to him/her, and as long as your interpretation doesn't have the author standing on tabletops screaming "no! no! you're completely wrong!" , going on your merry way. Let's face it, people will still be debating the ships long after the series is finished, and they'll still be convinced they're correct no matter what they see in print. I don't think the Harry we've been shown will suddenly grow taller than Ron, amazingly buff, and start ordering Dumbledore around. I do think the Harry we've been shown will continue to stumble upon powers he doesn't know he has, and become keen to learn more. And I don't just mean magical, as in Parseltongue and expert flying, but burgeoning if reluctant leadership (DA) and other human traits an adolescent can discover. After all, he's got a "full agenda coming up" and surely JKR will arm him for that! cheers dc From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Sun Nov 30 05:19:30 2003 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 00:19:30 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Twitchy, prowling Snape? Message-ID: <31FB840B.72A48499.4B073798@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86134 In a message dated 11/29/2003 6:42:56 PM Eastern Standard Time, justcarol67 at yahoo.com writes: > --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" > wrote: > > Did anyone else notice how Rowling describes Snape in the pensieve > > scene? OoP p. 566 Bloomsbury: > > > > Quote: "Round-shouldered yet angular, he [Snape] walked in a twitchy > > manner that recalled a spider, and his oily hair was jumping about > > his face." > > > > The twitchy spidery thing really caught my eye. This is not at all > > how Rowling describes Snape's manner of walking as a grown-up. > > Whenever Harry sees him, Snape is either "gliding", or "sweeping", > > or "striding" or "walking swiftly". All these imply someone moving > > elegantly and with ease rather than clumsy or oddly. So why this > > twitchy description in the pensieve scene? What does a twitchy walk > > say about the person in question? > > > > The only other description of Snape's walk that might not fit in with > > the "elegant" is his "prowling" (PS p. 165 Bloomsbury). It says Harry > > recognised his prowling walk in the scene where Snape threatens > > Quirrell in the forest. I don't know if "prowling" goes into > > the "twitchy" category or not :-) But if Harry easily recognised > > Snape's prowling at the time, it follows that Snape usually walks in > > a prowling manner, or Harry would not have recognised him. Does that > > mean Snape usually moves around "striding in a prowling manner"? I'm > > confused .-) > > > > So, what to make of this? Is Snape's walk twitchy, or is it > > sweepingly elegant? It couldn't possibly be both? And what does it > > say about him as a person...? > > Carol: > I think the "twitchy" walk was part of his awkward adolescence and > that he either grew out of it or consciously overcame it. I don't > think "prowling" is incompatible with gliding. Remember that Harry > still thinks that Snape is sneaking around trying to get the stone for > Voldemort in this scene. But the gliding of the adult Snape is not > sneaking so much as one of the elements of his persona that gives him > power over others, his students in particular. It goes along with his > whispers or his sometimes silky voice. The neglected, abused boy has > transformed himself to the best of his ability into someone that it > would be foolish and dangerous to mess with. He doesn't torture his > students like Umbridge; he cows them. And what he'll do to his real > enemies when his powers are unleashed should be very > interesting indeed. > > Carol Now me (just joking!) Oryomai: I agree with Carol in the fact that he changed himself for his better, but I have a different idea as to when/how/why he changed. I figured that TwitchyTeen!Snape changed into Sexy!Snape (*vbg*) of now during his time with the Death Eaters. The Death Eaters gave him power and strength. I assume that he was a Potion Maker or something of the like for them, so he was important. For probably the first time in his life, Snape was decently well-liked. He fit in somewhere. That's all any of us want. He probably learned from people like Lucius Malfoy (who I imagine was always the way he is now), and he became like them. Whether it's a good thing or a bad thing, Snape, IMHO, owes alot of who he is now to the Death Eaters. Any thoughts? Oryomai From catlady at wicca.net Sun Nov 30 05:26:54 2003 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 05:26:54 -0000 Subject: Squibs verses Muggles In-Reply-To: <20031129221640.42749.qmail@web60002.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86135 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, KT Waters wrote: << Well a Squib is a non-magic person born to magic parents. So they are non-magic. Non-magic people are Muggles. A squib is just a type of muggle, so a Squib would only live an average of 76 years I think it is, whereas a wizard - I don't know, 150 years? >> Part of the question is WHY do wizards live so much longer than Muggles? Is it just because they have magic inside them, or does it also require the use of Magical Medicine? I suppose that a Muggle who married a wizard would live longer than other Muggles because being allowed to use the the skillful Healers at St. Mungo's, but not as long as a wizard because of not having magic inside. So even if a Squib is the same as a Muggle, Squibs who remain in the magical community (like Filch) would live longer than average Muggles. I don't think that a Squib is the same as a Muggle -- the two Squibs we've met, Filch and Figg, have special communication with their cats. Like, I am Catlady, but I am a Muggle: my cats understand "dinner" and "bad kitty!" and "laugh", but not "keep watch over Harry", and they can tell me they're hungry, they want to be petted, or something's wrong, but not "Mundungus Apparated away". This has been pointed out on list and suggested (sorry, I don't remember by whom) that communication with cats in an innate Squib trait that Muggles don't have. In addition, Hogwarts is enchanted so that any Muggle who blunders upon it sees just an old ruin with a "Danger, Keep Out" sign, but Filch finds his way around Hogwarts. It has been suggested that Squibs innately are not affected by Muggle-repelling spells because of not being Muggles. From coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com Sun Nov 30 06:35:22 2003 From: coriolan_cmc at hotmail.com (Caius Marcius) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 06:35:22 -0000 Subject: Wizard Prison Land (filk) Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86137 Wizard Prison Land (OOP, Chap. 25) To the tune of Winter Wonderland Dedicated to Iggy McSnurd THE SCENE: Undisclosed. With delirious joy, VOLDEMORT greets the release of ten key Death Eaters from Azkaban VOLDEMORT: Slayers freed from their jailers Homeland secur'ty failures Convicted ex-cons Just won back their wands Waltzing out of wizard prison land. THE AZKABAN 10: Cry, "Hooray!" for the Dark Lord, Who serves as our parole board Dementors fake out So we can break out Waltzing out of wizard prison land. VOLDEMORT In the meantime, I have my supporters All of whom will serve me eagerly With a little spying And some torture I'll finally procure The prophecy VOLDEMORT & THE AZKABAN 10: And of course we'll conspire Cause we're such fiendish liars To Potter lay low And crush his halo Waltzing out of wizard prison land. FUDGE Voldy and his ilk, they ev'ry law shun Death Eaters are rallying to Black In my statement I am urging caution Do not have a cow or a heart attack HARRY & HERMIONE So we learn from the papers Of the DE escapers Oh how Voldy laughed to see all his staff Waltzing out of wizard prison land. ALL Waltzing out of wizard prison land, Waltzing out of wizard prison land. - CMC HARRY POTTER FILKS http://home.att.net/~coriolan/hpfilks.htm (updated today with 56 new filks, 30-some Xmas carols, 2.5 new musicals, and 1.0 new Beatles' albums) From catlady at wicca.net Sun Nov 30 06:42:25 2003 From: catlady at wicca.net (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston)) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 06:42:25 -0000 Subject: Severus/Lucius In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86138 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "snapesmate" wrote: > There must be a reasonable explaination as to why Lucius, a devoted > Voldemort butt kisser is so tight with Severus, whom Sirius > described as Lucius' "lap dog" and whom Voldemort appears to have > described as the "one who has left him for good and would of course > be killed". As far as I can tell from reading the books, Lucius doesn't know that Severus turned traitor to Voldemort; Lucius acts friendly with Severus and speaks well of Severus to people at the Ministry because he believes that Severus is still a servant of Voldemort. So it must be either that Voldemort didn't mean Severus was 'the one who has left [him] for good', or that the Death Eaters didn't understand that Voldemort meant Severus. Maybe Karkaroff was the 'left forever', Bagman was the 'coward', and Severus the 'loyal servant'. Maybe Barty Jr didn't even have a place in the Circle. > I also felt Severus' reaction in the hospital scene near the > end of GoF, when Harry described Lucius Malfoy was one of the DEs > at the graveyard was important as well. The way he started to > motion to Harry while glancing over at Fudge? I had thought that incident meant that Severus had believed Lucius's excuse about having been under the Imperius Curse rather than choosing to be evil, until Lucius's voluntary attendence at the Graveyard Gathering opened Severus's eyes to Lucius's true character. Since that enlightenment, Severus only pretends to be friends with Lucius, in order to pump Lucius for info on LV's plans. But other people on this list, certain that Snape is too perceptive to have been fooled by Lucius, interrupt Snape's gesture to mean that he is scared Harry will list him among people attending the Graveyard Gathering, because (they say) he was there. And therefore doesn't have to explain to LV why he wasn't there. From kate_bag at hotmail.com Sun Nov 30 06:49:29 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 06:49:29 -0000 Subject: Genetics, descent and Re: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86139 > Pip!Squeak: > Thank you, I've read them. As for 'we've covered this topic' - > if you can repeat your arguments, I can repeat mine [grin]. > > Your theory is that Mark Evans is a distant cousin of Harry Potter. > There is *no*, NO canon evidence that Mark Evans is in any way > related to Harry Potter. > > Evan, for those who don't know, is the Welsh language form of John. > The spelling 'Evan' dates from about the 15th Century - 'Ifan' is an > alternate spelling. > > To say that because two people have the surname 'Evans' they are > related is roughly as provable as arguing that two people > called 'Johnson' are related. They might be. But they might well > have no ancestry in common *at all* - the surname is derived from > the ancestor's given name. The 'Evan' who gave his name to Mark's > family line could well be a completely different person from > the 'Evan' who gave his name to Lily's family line. Now Kate: There may be no canon evidence that Mark Evans isn't Harry's relative, but there certainly isn't any evidence that he isn't, either. The point is, JKR *rarely* puts information like this in her books just for it's own sake. Take book one for instance: there is one very quick mention of old Mrs. Figg, and an even *briefer* mention later in book four...but neither of these were mistakes. Mrs. Figg is turning into an important character in the series...I expect we'll see much more of her in the future. I would also like to add (as I am sure people before me have) that JKR loves her names...and Mark Evans just seems like too common of a name for it to be just a coincidence. Why would she re-use the Evans surname? I have heard her say in interviews (sorry, don't have a reference...I believe it was 20/20) that when she hears a name she thinks is interesting she writes it in a notevook, and every time she writes a new character she consults her little book. I'm sure the name "Mark Evans" wasn't in her little book of names...especially when the Evans name has already been used (sorry, no canon for this...but I don't believe there have been any other instances of reusing names in the Potter series unless a family relationship was present). Reusing such a common surname just isn't like Rowling...she did it for a reason. This is just too inconsistant with her past writing style to be a coincidence. I believe JKR left us this hint on purpose...whether it was a red herring or not will remain to be seen. ~Kate (who was unconvinced of a Mark-Harry relationship when it was first proposed, but becomes more and more convinced every time she hears it). From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 30 07:40:35 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 07:40:35 -0000 Subject: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86140 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "bluesqueak" wrote: Carol: > > Clearly Lily's > > muggle father (and I think Mark Evans's muggle father as well) had > > some recent squib ancestors who in turn must have had witch/wizard > > ancestors. > > > Lily's mother seems to have been an ordinary muggle. > Pip!Squeak: > > Not clear to me. > > Firstly, there is no evidence apart from a coincidence of surnames > that Mark Evans is related to Harry Potter. My local phonebook has > an entire large page of Evans's. It's a very common surname. > Geoff: True - try a Welsh phone book.... However, as many of have said, JKR's coincidences can often be suspect. Can I just refer you back to a longish post (message 85255) in which I put togather a lot of the verious bits of evidence which just /could/ support the theory. Geoff From silent_ghost227 at yahoo.com.au Sun Nov 30 07:42:13 2003 From: silent_ghost227 at yahoo.com.au (silent_ghost227) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 07:42:13 -0000 Subject: Twitchy, prowling Snape? In-Reply-To: <31FB840B.72A48499.4B073798@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86141 Hmmm, I believe that Snape was nervous as a teenager, used to suffering curses and hexes, as opposed to casting them, when he reached adulthood. He wasn't well liked, and perhaps that didn't help the 'twitchiness' at all. Though one wonders, in regard to the theory of the death-eaters effect on him, what, besides the obvious reasons, drew him to Voldemort? He regrets it now. What did Voldy offer him that he thought so important? Back to the topic at hand, I believe he is more sure of himself as an adult, hence the change in the way he moves. From IAmLordCassandra at aol.com Sun Nov 30 08:52:47 2003 From: IAmLordCassandra at aol.com (IAmLordCassandra at aol.com) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 03:52:47 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Twitchy, prowling Snape? Message-ID: <1db.158cb918.2cfb09df@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86142 In a message dated 11/30/2003 12:28:12 AM Pacific Standard Time, silent_ghost227 at yahoo.com.au writes: > Hmmm, I believe that Snape was nervous as a teenager, used to > suffering curses and hexes, as opposed to casting them, when he > reached adulthood. He wasn't well liked, and perhaps that didn't help > the 'twitchiness' at all. Though one wonders, in regard to the theory > of the death-eaters effect on him, what, besides the obvious reasons, > drew him to Voldemort? He regrets it now. What did Voldy offer him > that he thought so important? > > Back to the topic at hand, I believe he is more sure of himself as an > adult, hence the change in the way he moves. Me (Cassie): I've been thinking about this a lot. Well, actually, I've been thinking about Young!Snape crying in the corner--but this is in the same vein XP I think this adds to my own theory. Ever since I read the passage in Occlumency where Snape describes weak people I've wondered if he's speaking from personal experience. An awkward outcast crying in the corner would seem like the weak people he's so venomous towards. ~Cassie~ [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 09:29:53 2003 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 09:29:53 -0000 Subject: Harry's ideal ending & my idea of a horrible ending Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86143 It occured to me that the ideal ending to book seven from Harry's point of view might just be to be a normal teenage wizard. He might not be an auror, or headmaster or famous Quiddith player. He might be quite happy being just Harry, with no prophecy hanging over his head anymore, no more Voldemort nightmares, no more weight of the world on his shoulders. And no more having to live with the Dursleys! He wouldn't need their protection anymore so he could go where he liked. He could live with the Weasleys, which I'm sure would be his first choice, or possibly even the Grangers, if Hermione set it up. He'd be 17 by the end of book seven, so maybe he'd even live on his own or rent a place with Ron, provided he had something to do for a living. Sure, he's got a lot of gold in Gringotts, but it's not enough to last forever. Besides, I can't see Harry as just sitting there doing nothing with his days - he'd probably prefer to work at something. Just being an ordinary wizard who goes to work, dates, visits friends, etc., would suit Harry very well, I think. I saw an interview with JKR on Biography where she said she had the epilogue to the series already written. This tells me that she's already decided everyone's fate, their careers, their spouses, etc. (if she uses the epilogue for that purpose and goes that far ahead in time, that is). I could see Harry dating Ginny by the end of the series, or possibly even still looking for the right girl. Ron and Hermione could be seriously dating, with Harry happy as can be about them finally getting together. Those scenarios would be fine with me. :) My idea of a thoroughly depressing, horrible ending would be if Harry defeated Voldemort, moved out of the Dursleys, was dating Ginny, getting a normal wizarding life for the first time ever - and then he dies in some freak accident a few months or years after defeating Voldemort. Especially if the epilogue told us something like "Harry lived to nineteen before being killed by the Knight Bus in a freak accident.". :( I cringe just thinking about the possibility of that kind of an ending. Diana L. From dianasdolls at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 09:54:58 2003 From: dianasdolls at yahoo.com (Diana) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 09:54:58 -0000 Subject: Time Turner workings (Was Re: time travel revisited) In-Reply-To: <20031129052453.22026.qmail@web14203.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86144 -- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Laura Clapham wrote: > Hi Everybody! I have been lurking on this list for a long time now - and would like to say that this is an excellent list - although responsible for my thesis productivity slowing down to a crawling pace. > > I have read a lot of the theories on time travel posted a long time ago but still have trouble getting my head around the following. In POA, when HH go back in time three hours why do they end up in a slightly different place to where they were three hours ago? If they were really going back three hours wouldn't they appear virtually on top of their past selves? And what would happen if they arrived in a room where there were other people? Would this appear to be apparating? This in my mind also ties in to Hagrid's disappearance at the train station in PS - as I assume Hagrid never learnt enough magic to apparate, could he have used a time turner to disappear? > > I hope this post makes sense and hello to all the other laura's on the list! > > princesslaura Diana (me) replies: I also wondered about how Hermione and Harry move in space as well as time when using the time-turner. My preferred theory is that the time-turner was spelled so as not to deposit the wearer on top of her previous self when used. In Hermione's case, she might get tired of crashing into herself twice or three times a day during the school year if that's what happened everytime she used it. Obviously these time-turners are meant to be worn because they come with a chain to put around the user's neck. And the fact that McGonagall was able to write to the MOM and request use of this device on Hermione's behalf tells me that other students and wizards must have requested to use these time-turners before. So, if they are designed to be used (albeit with strict supervision and express permission from the DoM at the MoM, apparently) and ARE actually in use around the wizarding world, the makers of these devices MUST have incorporated a spell into them that deposits the user a certain distance away from their earlier self. Thus, when Harry and Hermione appear in the Great Hall, they immediately run and hide in the closet because they hear themselves coming down the staircase. So, the distance the user is deposited from his earlier incarnation must not be very great - perhaps 20-40 feet? It makes sense to extrapolate that if the time-turners can be spelled to deposit the user so many feet from the user's earlier self, than they could be spelled to deposit the user in a place where there were no witnesses to their sudden appearance. Maybe the time-turners are fitted with a proximity sensor to look out for other people in the area before it pops the user into the past? An idea anyway. As to your other question: I would guess that Hagrid can apparate and disapparate as the reason for his disappearance at the train station. Wizards have to be licensed to legally apparate/disapparate. We have seen no evidence that a wizard must attend school in order to take the test to legally apparate/disapparte. So, either Hagrid took the appration test and passed or he didn't take the test and just did an illegal (in the WW view) disapparation from the train station. Diana L. From patientx3 at aol.com Sun Nov 30 10:42:51 2003 From: patientx3 at aol.com (huntergreen_3) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 10:42:51 -0000 Subject: Snape In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86145 "Juju" wrote: >>I think Snape was in love with Lily Potter when they went to school together. I think also that there will be much more revealed about him, he's one of the most complex and contradictory characters in my opinion, so much inner conflict.<< HunterGreen: I have heard this theory several times, and I just have to ask, why do you think that? Why would Snape be in love with Lily? What indication is there that he is? What would be accomplished by this? I suppose people like the idea of him being something more than harsh and cold and that his hatred of Harry/James is fueled by something more than what we've seen, but why does that love have to be with Lily? For one thing, she's a muggle-born, and he was not only in Slytherin and head of the Slytherin house, but he went on to become a DEATH EATER for goodness sake. I imagine that he's changed his mind about the whole pure-blood ideals by NOW, but as a teenager, I've seen nothing to indicate that he was anything less than pure-blood enthusiast. The fact that she was a muggle-born, coupled with James liking her probably turned young Severus completely off. And as for there being more to the James/Snape hate, why does there need to be? There were people who I had problems with in high school (and who I *hated*, by the way) when the source was not much more than how I dressed. The idea being that Snape's hatred (of James and Harry at least) and some of his emotion, ahem, 'issues' has to do with a simple unrequited teenage love simplifies him far too much. -I don't really think this is where the story is headed either. If JKR was planning to reveal that, there would have to be a hint at SOME POINT. The pensieve scene would have been the perfect time to do so, but instead the opposite is done. There's actually more evidence for VAMIRE!Snape than there is for this. I can see more of a case made for Lily being in love with him. The pensieve scene aside (which I think was less her being 'in love' and more her being rather unsettled by what James' was doing), she might have been interested in the smart loner, and her feelings about James (him being arrogant and all) would have made Severus more interesting. Of course, I doubt any of that would survive him calling her a mudblood... -HunterGreen. From kcawte at ntlworld.com Sun Nov 30 19:55:34 2003 From: kcawte at ntlworld.com (Kathryn Cawte) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 11:55:34 -0800 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Titled characters (aka Sir Nick) References: <20031129234633.95088.qmail@web60006.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <016601c3b77b$eb469e00$a6706751@kathryn> No: HPFGUIDX 86146 Jadeau xxx > So? It doesn't mean there aren't any. I mean, write that story in a muggle world, set in a muggle boarding school and with the muggle government. In the government there are no lords - also there are none in the MOM. Presumably Sir Nicholas was knighted by King Ethelred or whoever was king at the time in England when he was alive (sorry I can't remember) for doing something muggleishy worthy, then they guessed he was a 'witch' (was witch-burning aorund then? I thought it was Christian-burning) and cut his head off? Or is this out of date thinking about it? > > Surely beheading people didn't start this early on? Hanging was popular I suppose but as far as I know if the Saxons wanted you dead the would ... wait hang on, sorry about that. > > You could be: stoned, beheaded, hung, burnt, drowned or have your neck broken for being any of the following: a traitor, an outlaw, a witch, a wizard or a theif. > > So if Nick was one of these and a Knight? So he did something good and then some magic, or what? Please can someone enlighten me on the answer. > > > K Well for a start you've moved the poor guy nearly 500 years back in time! 1492 is Henry VII and 7 years after the end of the Wars of the Roses, not anything to do with Saxons at all. We didn't really have large-scale witch burning in this country anyway and I'm fairly certain that what there was was confined to peasants not Knights of the realm. He could well have received a knighthood for services to the crown in the Wars of the Roses or maybe just for coming to the King's attention in some other way. Beheading was the traditional punishment for anyone of any importance anyway so Sir Nick would have likely been beheaded regardless of his 'crime'. Botched beheading wasn't at all uncommon either btw. As a Knight he would most likely have been beheaded for some kind of treason - but since treason can be roughly translated as 'annoying the reigning monarch in some way' that doesn't help much either. K From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 30 12:51:16 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 12:51:16 -0000 Subject: Titled characters (WAS Voldemort's "lordship") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86147 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pengolodh_sc" wrote: Christian Stubs: > > But I still don't see any lords or other aristocrats in the WW, > > only gentry (except for the Bloody Baron, who's probably German > > or Austrian rather than British, if it matters). > > This made me curious - I do not recall ever seeing anything in the > books pointing in any particular direction regarding the Bloody > Baron's nationality, but I can easily have missed something. What in > the books made you think he is German or Austrian? Geoff: Speaking as a UK resident, my comment would be that the title Baron is fairly rare - Baronet and also Baroness is not. Earl, Lord and Duke are reasonably common and the wife of an Earl, for example, might be styled Countess. Hence, I too would be inclined to think of the Bloody Baron as being foreign. (Flanders and Swann: "It's knowing they're foreign that makes them so mad" - A Song of Pariotic Prejudice). Geoff From pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk Sun Nov 30 13:52:26 2003 From: pipdowns at etchells0.demon.co.uk (bluesqueak) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 13:52:26 -0000 Subject: Genetics, descent and Re: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86148 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dj_bagshaw" wrote: > > Pip!Squeak: > > The 'Evan' who gave his name to Mark's > > family line could well be a completely different person from > > the 'Evan' who gave his name to Lily's family line. > > > > Now Kate: > > There may be no canon evidence that Mark Evans isn't Harry's > relative, but there certainly isn't any evidence that he isn't, > either. The point is, JKR *rarely* puts information like this in > her books just for it's own sake. > > Take book one for instance: there is one very quick mention of > old Mrs. Figg, and an even *briefer* mention later in book > four...but neither of these were mistakes. Mrs. Figg is turning > into an important character in the series...I expect we'll see > much more of her in the future. Pip!Squeak: Mrs Figg's screen time in book one is considerably more than Mark Evan's screen time. She breaks her leg, she gets knocked down by Dudley, she later gives Harry odd tasting chocolate cake. We know she lives two streets away, has lots of cats, and is regarded as mad. Mark Evans gets one paragraph in OOP. The closer comparison is Sirius Black and his flying motorbike; but in that case there was no obvious connection to Harry. The use of 'Mark' and 'Evans' positively invites a comparison, especially since JKR later emphasises that 'Evans' was Harry's mother's surname. > Kate: > I would also like to add (as I am sure people before me have) that > JKR loves her names...and Mark Evans just seems like too common of > a name for it to be just a coincidence. Why would she re-use the > Evans surname? > I don't believe there have been any other instances of > reusing names in the Potter series unless a family relationship > was present). Pip!Squeak: Ummm.... I could be wrong about this, but I think in every other case we find out the relationship *before or at the same time* that we find the common surname? It's also been heavily emphasised that the *wizarding world* is very inbred; a common surname means a relationship. This is not the case in the *muggle world* (to which Mark Evans currently belongs). > Kate: > Reusing such a common surname just isn't like Rowling...she did it > for a reason. This is just too inconsistant with her past writing > style to be a coincidence. I believe JKR left us this hint on > purpose...whether it was a red herring or not will remain to be > seen. Pip!Squeak: I agree that the name 'Mark Evans' is no co-incidence. The dead give- away is the use of 'Mark', which is a very clear correspondence with Harry being 'marked'. What I'm not sure of is whether JKR has *already* given us the parallel; and it's nothing to do with Mark getting a Hogwarts letter. At the start of PS/SS, Harry is ten years old, makes cheeky comments to Dudley, and is bullied by him. At the start of OOP, Mark Evans is ten years old, makes cheeky comments to Dudley, and gets bullied by him. Dudley is still bullying 'Harry Potter'. He can't beat up the real one, but he's making do with imitations. As to whether Mark would get a Hogwarts letter - we meet him in early August. If he turned eleven any time between then and late September, he should *already* be at Hogwarts. Mark could turn up next year. Still doesn't mean he's a long lost or distant relative. There is the potential for a very nice plot line where Harry is fooled by the *wizarding* assumption that a common surname means a relationship. Then he finds that Mark is no relation to him, and he (Harry) truly has no family left besides the Dursley's [I can feel the tears coming to my eyes now ;-)] Rowling (to date) isn't giving us happy endings. For Harry to find out he does have some family after all, and that he has things in common with that family? Too happy an ending. Unless, of course, Mark dies. Let's hope for Mark's sake that he *isn't* related to Harry. Because if he is, he's doomed. Pip!Squeak From RSFJenny19 at aol.com Sun Nov 30 14:10:51 2003 From: RSFJenny19 at aol.com (Jenny) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:10:51 -0000 Subject: Free!Lupin was TBAY: In the control room In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86149 Jenny, quite relieved at Olivier's agreement that curing Lupin would not be a desired solution, listened as he spoke, eager to hear where he was going with FILK FOAD. At this, Jenny sighed a wistful sigh. It all sounded so wonderful, but... "You don't agree?" Jenny heard the challenge in Olivier's voice as he spoke. "I *want* to," Jenny answered earnestly, "more than anything I want redemption for Lupin for all he has suffered. But after seeing how cruelly JKR treated Sirius, I wonder if it could truly be. It also conflicts with my belief that Arthur will take over Fudge's job as MoM. "What I mean," Jenny continued hastily, just in case Olivier wanted to interrupt, "is that once we have one Order member in an influential position such as the MoM, acting publicly, I believe the Order - remember, they're a secret society, and therefore not likely to come out to the public - would focus more on stealth operations and leave public affairs to the MoM. Even now, really, there's no longer a need to convince people of Voldemort's return because that has now been acknowledged. "So, you see, it makes a place in society for Lupin rather... superfluous," she finished tenatively. "Unless, of course," Jenny's voice strengthened as a grin threatened to escape, "he were to become Arthur's Undersecretary - Umbridge's old job to Fudge - it would be appropriate, would it not?" ~RSFJenny~ 'Yeah, Quirrell was a great teacher, there was just that minor drawback of him having Lord Voldemort sticking out of the back of his head.' -Harry Potter, OotP http://www.geocities.com/rsfjenny/HP From pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no Sun Nov 30 14:14:03 2003 From: pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no (pengolodh_sc) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:14:03 -0000 Subject: Titled characters (WAS Voldemort's "lordship") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86150 --- In HPforGrownups, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: > Speaking as a UK resident, my comment would be that the title > Baron is fairly rare - Baronet and also Baroness is not. Earl, > Lord and Duke are reasonably common and the wife of an Earl, > for example, might be styled Countess. > > Hence, I too would be inclined to think of the Bloody Baron as > being foreign. (Flanders and Swann: "It's knowing they're > foreign that makes them so mad" - A Song of Pariotic Prejudice). 1. A Baroness is a wife of a Baron, so I don't expect Baronesses to be significantly more common or rare than Barons. 2. To say that Barons are rare and Earls and Dukes are common doesn't hold true to me. The title of Lord sounds common, but that is because all Barons, Viscounts, Earls, and Marquesses are entitled to be styled as "Lord", but in addition, the Scots rank equivalent to English, Welsh, Irish Baron is styled simply "Lord", as Baron in Scotland is not a peerage rank. As far as I presently can determine, there are today among the British peerages 35 hereditary Dukedoms, 57 hereditary Marquessats, 338 hereditary Earldoms, 350 hereditary Viscounties, 878 hereditary Baronies, 147 Scots Lordships of the lowest peerage rank, and 130 Scots Feudal Baronies. As such I will say that the title of Baron itself does not in any particular way point at the Bloody Baron being foreign. Best regards Christian Stub? From meriaugust at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 14:53:39 2003 From: meriaugust at yahoo.com (meriaugust) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:53:39 -0000 Subject: Wizard to ghost? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86151 Here's a question that popped into my head while reading the posts about titles in the WW. People were discussing Nearly Headless Nick and why he is refered to as "sir" ie: what had he done to get himself a title and then what had happened to lead to his beheading. Someone suggested that he perhaps had been discovered to be a wizard and was executed for that, but is there any canon evidence to confirm that every Hogwarts ghost (or every ghost in the world for that matter) was a witch or wizard in life? Moaning Myrtle of course was a Hogwarts stuident, and Professor Binns was boring students there for years before his death, but what about Nick and the Fat Friar and the Bloody Baron and the Grey Lady? All magical (non- Muggle) people in life? Or is Hogwarts merely a haven for ghosts regardless of magical status in life? Did the person have to have some Hogwarts connection before they haunt there? What about the muggles who become ghosts, if any? Do they fall under the jurisdiction of the MoM or are they stuck with figuring out their post-biological existence on their own? Any thoughts? From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com Sun Nov 30 15:07:50 2003 From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 15:07:50 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86152 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > You didn't mention me, Kneasy, but I think I'm the one who brought up > the topic. In any case, I also have no interest in or connection with > New Age or "touch-feely" theories. I simply think that the distinction > between good and evil must be maintained and that Harry must not > succumb to the temptation to kill or inflict pain for pleasure. He > must not become Voldemort's pupil like Bellatrix. The Unforgiveable > Curses are unforgiveable for a reason, and I can't see JKR changing > the rules and allowing him and his friends to use them. He must find > some other way to kill Voldemort, either by causing Voldemort's own > spell to backfire, or, if you prefer, in a fair, heroic, by-the-rule > fight using Godric Gryffindor's sword. Maybe that's the reason the > sword was introduced in the first place. > > Carol, who also thinks that Fawkes the Phoenix will somehow be involved OK, Carol, sorry to have ignored you in my blanket swipe at those who I consider are being unnecessarily squeamish. Consider yourself included. I just don't get it. Why should Harry kill for pleasure? Probably that taunt from Bella has wound everybody up. I don't believe her. Full stop. It's a deliberate mis-lead IMO. Did Peter relish the thought of killing 13 muggles? Doubt he even thought that far. It was all panic and desperation and on the spur of the moment. They just got in the way. Colateral damage on the High St. Did Crouch Snr take pleasure in putting an Imperio! on young Barty? Not likely. No, Harry's Crucio! in the MoM wasn't very successful because he hadn't done it before. When has he ever got a spell right first time? Bella was playing mind games. Or JKR is. I can hear DD now, "Well, you see Harry, Bella said that to stop you using any of those spells on her, but of course, with the tremendous, unbounded, universal, cosmic love you have for all creatures, your enemies drop dead from saccharine poisoning anyway." As an aside, am I atypical in thinking that as the series progresses a few of the other characters are becoming more interesting than Harry? Snape, Dumbledore and Lupin, for example? No, it'll be *me* that takes pleasure in Voldy coming to a sticky end. Harry will just feel relief, as will everybody else in the WW. Fair fight is out. Voldy will never fight fair. Fawkes and the sword have already been used once, and when does JKR repeat plot devices for the resolution of crises? The wands won't work; the conflict occurs at *both* ends, not just with Harry. There is one device that has yet to be used - Peter's silver digits. Probably once again Harry will be at Voldy's non- existent mercy and a deus ex machina look-alike has to rescue him yet again. He really is a rubbish wizard when he faces Voldy, but he is lucky. Personally, I hope it doesn't end with somebody else doing Harry's dirty work for him. I'd consider that a cop-out. I don't mind if he strangles him with the Old School tie, stuffs a mandrake down his throat, or gives him a Bowtruckle enema, just so long as he nails the bastard. Harry didn't seem to suffer from any moral misgivings when faced with Sirius in the Shrieking Shack, so why should he with Voldemort, the beast that zapped his parents? Anyway, JKR hasn't bothered much about sparing Harry's any of feelings in the past five books, so why start now? Assuming that Harry survives, which I don't think he will. Kneasy From belijako at online.no Sun Nov 30 15:57:08 2003 From: belijako at online.no (Berit Jakobsen) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 15:57:08 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86153 Kneazy wrote: Harry didn't seem to suffer from any moral misgivings when faced with Sirius in the Shrieking Shack, so why should he with Voldemort, the beast that zapped his parents? Berit responds: Well, Harry seemed to suffer some kind of moral misgivings, didn't he? Why else would he hesitate in killing Sirius? In CoS p. 251 (Bloomsbury) we see Harry arguing with himself, trying to justify his urge of killing Sirius. He raised his wand, but Harry remained frozen in that position. The seconds ticked... The truth is he couldn't bring himself to do it. Afterwards Harry is momentarily disappointed with himself for "losing his nerve". But why did he lose his nerve? I think it's because, fortunately, killing doesn't come easily to a normal human being. So yes; Harry hesitating shows he did have moral misgivings... And then we also see Harry actively preventing Lupin and Sirius from killing Peter. Reason? He reckoned his dad wouldn't have wanted his best friends to become killers just for Peter... Again emphasizing what makes killing so ugly: It's not about it being so "bad" to kill a baddie, but the problem is more what it does to the person doing the killing. Peter wasn't worth Lupin and Sirius becoming killers... I find that interesting. Just a little "sidetracking", but an important one I think :-) Berit From HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com Sun Nov 30 16:02:55 2003 From: HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com (HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com) Date: 30 Nov 2003 16:02:55 -0000 Subject: Reminder - Weekly Chat Message-ID: <1070208175.22.68934.m6@yahoogroups.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86154 We would like to remind you of this upcoming event. Weekly Chat Date: Sunday, November 30, 2003 Time: 11:00AM - 7:00PM CST (GMT-06:00) Hi everyone! Don't forget, chat happens today, 11 am Pacific, 2 pm Eastern, 7 pm UK time. *Chat times are not changing for Daylight Saving/Summer Time.* Chat generally goes on for about 5 hours, but can last as long as people want it to last. Go into any Yahoo chat room and type /join HP:1 For further info, see the Humongous BigFile, section 3.3. http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/hbfile.html#33 Hope to see you there! From angelofthenorth at cantab.net Sun Nov 30 13:40:20 2003 From: angelofthenorth at cantab.net (Angel Moules) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 13:40:20 +0000 Subject: spoiler warning: Twitchy, prowling Snape? Message-ID: <3FC9F344.7060404@cantab.net> No: HPFGUIDX 86155 Actually, seeing the opinions that have been mooted on this thread about the effect the DEs had on Snape, I would say that the opposite was the case. I don't think the DEs gave him confidence, I believe that they sapped him of it entirely. This is why: In an organisation such as the DEs the value that would be placed on the life of a human being is arbitrary, and solely based on his/her usefulness at the point in time that a decision would be made. For example, look at Edmund in the Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. If you've not read LW&W then the next bit is a spoiler S P O I L E R S P A C E He's wooed by the White Witch, and given all the candy he wants, and left gasping for more. He would hand over his family, just for that candy. She would make him a prince, Aslan a King. And therein lies the difference.In parallel: to Voldemort, SS is merely a servant, to AD a master. To continue. Edmund doesn't know Aslan, and therefore goes along with the White WItch, rather than trusting his sister. He is redeemed by Aslan, but always knows that he is a traitor. The impression that we're given of SS is similar. He's had a miserable childhood, and rather than trusting the Headmaster he's seen at a distance, he goes with what he knows how to do, and where he thinks he will be valued. The DEs at first let him think he's valuable, until he starts to realise he's only as good as the next potion, the next kill. Whatever artificial confidence he has been given deserts him, and he's left even worse off than he was before. Dumbledore finds him, and rescues him, and infuses him with the confidence that is needed. That hard won confidence is brittle, so Snape is either a bully, or ignores Harry (end of OOTP). Against someone who really has confidence, Snape is shown up as a fraud. For example, take a look at the film, where you get a shot of Lucius and SS watching Quidditch. LM is poised, SS is twitchy, edgy by contrast. Yet he still has an air of effortless malevolence, that is intensified by the presence of his one-time mentor. On the other hand, we see Snape with AD at the beginning of Snape II, and there he is confident, the strength is drawn from AD. He is cowed slightly by being told that the matter of expulsion is not in his hands, but he keeps a poise there. Angel From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 30 14:22:46 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:22:46 -0000 Subject: Figg Theories In-Reply-To: <20031129235007.32831.qmail@web60005.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86156 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, KT Waters wrote: Jadeau: > Hang on, I am just confused. Can you explain? I thought she was Miss Arabella Figg; therefore, Figg is her maiden name? > Geoff: No. She is referred to as Mrs.Figg in both PS and OOTP. In GOF, when her name is given to Sirius by Dumbledore in a list of folk to be contacted, her style of address is not given, just her name. I did comment in a previous post that the description of her did fit more with the UK stereotype of a spinster than a widow. However.... Geoff From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 30 14:36:27 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:36:27 -0000 Subject: Genetics, descent and Re: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86157 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dj_bagshaw" wrote: Kate: > Why would she re-use the Evans > surname? I have heard her say in interviews (sorry, don't have a > reference...I believe it was 20/20) that when she hears a name she > thinks is interesting she writes it in a notevook, and every time she > writes a new character she consults her little book. I'm sure the > name "Mark Evans" wasn't in her little book of names...especially > when the Evans name has already been used (sorry, no canon for > this...but I don't believe there have been any other instances of > reusing names in the Potter series unless a family relationship was > present). > Geoff: I think, to be accurate, that Mark Evans is the first use of the name in the books. Lily's surname is not revealed until later during the Pensieve scene in OOTP( although am I right that JKR had mentioned Lily's name in an interview?). Responding to a further comment made by a different poster regarding Mark's age: in the UK, a child would enter the First Year (presentday Year 7) if their 11th birthday fell between 1st September and 31st August of the previous school year. So, if Harry's comments to Dudley were late in July, Mark would appear in Hogwarts when Harry was entering his 6th year in September 1996. Geoff From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Sun Nov 30 16:40:30 2003 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 11:40:30 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] spoiler warning: Twitchy, prowling =?ISO-8859-1?B?oFNuYXBlPw==?= Message-ID: <2FB892C1.3B234C17.4B073798@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86158 Angel wrote: >Actually, seeing the opinions that have been mooted on this >thread about the effect the DEs had on Snape, I would say >that the opposite was the case. I don't think the DEs gave >him confidence, I believe that they sapped him of it >entirely. Oryomai: I was more referring to his "don't mess with me" manner. As you said, the DEs don't put alot of value on human life and such. To survive in something like that, a person has to become tougher. Snape needed to learn how to be more confident in himself because if he didn't, he could be seen as weak. And Voldemort doesn't strike me as the type who would keep weak people around (Pettigrew has extenuating circumstances...). OTOH, Snape confidence could've come from leaving the DEs. Being able to get out of that group before it was too late. If that is the case, then he *still* owes who he is to the DEs - just in a more roundabout way. Oryomai From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sun Nov 30 16:41:49 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 11:41:49 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Titled characters (WAS Voldemort's "lordship") Message-ID: <163.29105d42.2cfb77cd@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86159 In a message dated 11/30/2003 8:17:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, gbannister10 at aol.com writes: Geoff: Speaking as a UK resident, my comment would be that the title Baron is fairly rare - Baronet and also Baroness is not. Earl, Lord and Duke are reasonably common and the wife of an Earl, for example, might be styled Countess. +++++++++++++ Sherrie here: Is this in modern Britain, or historical Britain? Was the title of "Baron" more common during earlier centuries (I'm thinking 12th or 13th - Henry II/Richard I)? According to Burke's (online at http://www.burkes-peerage.net/sites/peerage/sitepages/page66-baron.asp): "baron: holder of lowest rank of dignity, called a barony, in the peerage (2) of England, Great Britain, Ireland or United Kingdom (but almost never of Scotland, for which see lord). A related term is the now obsolescent 'baronage', meaning either the collective noun for the order of barons or a reference dealing with them. "In early medieval society in England a baron was a man who held land directly from a sovereign. The sovereign not necessarily the king. He might be a Count Palatine, for instance the Earl of Chester, or a Palatine Bishop, for instance that of Durham (see VERNON, B. for an example of a holder of baronial rank in such circumstances), both of whom at that time wielded massively devolved powers because of the important positions of their domains on the borders with Wales and Scotland respectively. But on a national scale barons comprised not just the body of men who were later to become barons in the sense of holders of a peerage (1) title of that rank but also every earl, or strictly speaking every such earl as held land directly from the King (which in practice amounted to all of them), for an earl at that time was primarily an official rather than a nobleman who possessed a personal dignity with a certain rank in the peerage." Somehow, I've always pictured the Bloody Baron as hailing ca. Magna Carta, or maybe earlier - sometime in the early Plantagenet years, at all events. Not as late as Sir Nick... if you'll pardon the pun. Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From SnapesSlytherin at aol.com Sun Nov 30 16:50:15 2003 From: SnapesSlytherin at aol.com (SnapesSlytherin at aol.com) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 11:50:15 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Wizard to ghost? Message-ID: <6565DA4B.52DF3110.4B073798@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86160 Well, every ghost in the world *is* a wizard. In OoP, Harry asks Nick about people coming back: OoP American Hardback pg. 860 "So you came back, didn't you?" Harry urged him. "People can come back, right? As ghosts. They don't have to disappear completely. *Well*?" he added impatiently when Nick continued to say nothing. Nearly Headless Nick hesitated, then said "Not everyone can come back as a ghost." "What d'you mean?" said Harry quickly. "Only ... only wizards." See? I don't think Nick would lie to Harry, Nick has no reason to lie to Harry. I assume that Nick would know. This seems like something Hermione would've read in a book... Oryomai From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 30 14:48:10 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:48:10 -0000 Subject: Titled characters (WAS Voldemort's "lordship") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86161 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pengolodh_sc" wrote: Geoff: > > Speaking as a UK resident, my comment would be that the title > > Baron is fairly rare - Baronet and also Baroness is not. Earl, > > Lord and Duke are reasonably common and the wife of an Earl, > > for example, might be styled Countess. Christian Stubs: > 1. A Baroness is a wife of a Baron, so I don't expect Baronesses to > be significantly more common or rare than Barons. > Geoff: You may well be right that Barons are often styled "Lord" but you have overlooked that a Baroness can also be "A woman holding the rank of baron". Quite what the parameters for this to occur are, I cannot say. The point is that the title Baroness occurs in the news a good deal more than Baron. There are a few Baronesses kicking around in the present Government by way of example. Perhaps Barons prefer to be Lords to remove the stigma of being a "robber Baron". Perhaps the Bloody Baron doesn't care.. :-) Geoff From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 30 13:44:19 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 13:44:19 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's ideal ending & my idea of a horrible ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031130134419.97178.qmail@web60002.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86162 >"Harry lived to nineteen before being killed by the Knight Bus >in a freak accident.". :( I cringe just thinking about the >possibility of that kind of an ending. > >Diana L. Rowling wouldn't do that. She would either kill Harry at the direct ending or leave him alive. Personally, I don't think she will kill him at all. Okay, so Pettigrew may die, Snape may die, even Dumbledore, one of the Weasleys and a fan of Harry's (a creevey?) but put those deaths aside - with the many others that have been promised - (uncle Vernon maybe?) - Harry won't be killed. I seriously seriously doubt it. I mean, I have written books my self, whole novels, but if I get an idea about a character, who perhaps is the main part, and then decide he will die, I find it very hard to carry on writing. And if Rowling cried when Black died, she won't live with herself if she kills Harry Potter himself. She would be saying "evil has won" and that just won't happen. Also in an interview she said she would write more than seven books only if she felt the great desire too at the end of the last. So it was meant to be an septology (Um?) just like Pullman's The Dark Materials was meant to be a Trilogy. But Lyra didn't die in his book (she was the main character) both her parents died and she lost many people she loved - after that is it not too harsh to kill her too? So I think what Rowling intends to do is just end it, so we can imagine what Harry does after Voldemort's defeat. There will be a struggle, no doubt, the above named will perhaps all die with many others, but Harry, Ronald and Hermione will break thorugh the other side. It just has to be. (IMHO) Thanks, Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 30 14:02:05 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:02:05 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Squibs verses Muggles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031130140205.67319.qmail@web60005.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86163 >This has been pointed out >on list and suggested (sorry, I don't remember by whom) that >communication with cats in an innate Squib trait that Muggles don't >have. >Carol Okay. Squibs have magic parents. So they know about magic. But they can't do ANY magic at all. It says this when Filch is trying ton get Fred's fireworks I think. But they must be slightly different form muggles I suppose, as Filch can be in Hogwarts and not repelled. Perhaps though, the cats are like Crookshanks - part Kneazle or whatever it was, that makes them more, like understanding. Crookshanks talked to Sirius didn't he? Like the owls, they must be magical and understand what you say. Maybe all owls can do this, just we scare them so they don't talk to us. Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 30 14:16:31 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:16:31 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Traitor yet again In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031130141631.31834.qmail@web60006.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86164 >Anything is possible after OoP, in my opinion. Snape may turn out to >be harry's saviour at the end, he also may turn out to be the >ultimate betrayer, which I hope is not going to happen. > > >Alla Now Me: (Jadeau) Snape won't be a betrayer. He won't. He is a bad guy made to look bad... We see this in the first book. It was Quirrell, Snape was saving Harry's life. If Snape was still a Deatheater - like Bellatrix - then he would not give a toss about some life debt he owes to Potter. I mean, who says that the life debt is now owed to Harry anyway, just becasue Potter saved Snape a long time ago? Snape owes his life to Potter who is dead, not Harry. So it is all totally messed up and Harry owes his life to Snape instead doesn't he, and Pettigrew owes his life to Harry. If there is traitor.... it won't be Snape. Perhaps Harry will betray himself. Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 30 14:29:23 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:29:23 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031130142923.8345.qmail@web60002.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86165 Pip!Squeak: > > > > Not clear to me. > > > > Firstly, there is no evidence apart from a coincidence of > > surnames that Mark Evans is related to Harry Potter. My local > > phonebook has an entire large page of Evans's. It's a very > > common surname. Jadeau (me): xxx Okay it is a common surname. But never mind. I mean, it is only a story book really isn't it? Rowling thinks carefully about everything. I think you are getting to involved and act like its the real world. If it is the real world then okay I agree there is a very very tiny chance me and this boy Mark who has the same surname as my mother's parents is related to me. However, this isn't the real world. We aren't going to find out until the next book comes out! --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 18:10:04 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 18:10:04 -0000 Subject: A Traitor in Their Midst In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86167 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tracy Hunt" wrote: > > wrote: > > Can anyone direct me to the interview in which JKR suggests that > Harry > > or his side will be betrayed by someone Harry trusts? I did a search > > for both "traitor" and "betrayal" using the interview search engine > > and came up with nothing. > > > > Two related questions: > > > > 1)Is that interview the source of all the ESE! speculation? If not, > > what (aside from an incurable impulse to theorize) is that train of > > thought all about? and > > > > 2) Why does the traitor have to be a member of the Order? I really > > don't buy Dumbledore, McGonagall, Lupin, Snape, or Bill as ESE. Why > > not a member of Dumbledore's Army, if not (ugh) Cho, how about a > > Gryffindor? My candidate of the moment is Seamus, who believed the > > lies about Harry in the Daily Prophet. He would make a nice parallel > > to Peter Pettigrew, a trusted roommate who drifted to the wrong side > > through weakness. (Then again, his dad's a muggle, which would make > > his family, and Dean Thomas's, candidates for extermination by the > > DEs.) Or maybe Parvati Patil and Lavender Brown? > > > > Reactions or suggestions, anybody? > > > > Carol > > now Tcy: > > Carol, I'm not sure of the interview...but the start of the ESE! > Lupin on this site can be blamed...um, I mean attributed to Pippin. > I believe the start of it was post Pippin's post #39562. In this > post, she posited that Lupin was ESE from his first scene (he gave > the Trio tainted chocolate). > > You can search the archives, though it takes a while. Some of the > other posts you might find interesting are: > > 39952, 51925, 51990, 52129, and 57900. > > You can also find links to many good posts at: > > http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/mysteries.html > (under Magical Creatures - about 1/3 of the way down the page) > > Hope that helps a little...good luck! > > Tcy Thanks, Tcy. I'll try to find time to search the archives if I get a break from work around Christmastime. Meanwhile, I still want to know whether there's an interview implying that someone will betray Harry, or whether it's all just speculation. I also want to know what people think of the possibility that the traitor might be a kid in the DA rather than an adult in the Order. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 18:15:47 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 18:15:47 -0000 Subject: Titled characters (WAS Voldemort's "lordship") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86168 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "pengolodh_sc" wrote: > --- In HPforGrownups, Carol wrote: > [snip] > > Or maybe Sir Nicholas was a baronet rather than a knight, > > which would still make him a "Sir." > > According to the cake in the Deathday-party in CoS, Sir Nicholas de > Mimsy-Porpington died in 1492, 119 years before the first letters > patent for baronets were drawn up (by King James I, as a means of > raising funds for occupying Ulster - the title was granted upon > payment of a fee of ? 1095, which was enough to maintain 30 > infantrymen in Ulster for three years - later a similar system of > baronetcies was introduced to pay for the settling of Nova Scotia). > > > But I still don't see any lords or other aristocrats in the WW, > > only gentry (except for the Bloody Baron, who's probably German > > or Austrian rather than British, if it matters). > > This made me curious - I do not recall ever seeing anything in the > books pointing in any particular direction regarding the Bloody > Baron's nationality, but I can easily have missed something. What in > the books made you think he is German or Austrian? > > Best regards > Christian Stub? Thanks for the information. My thought that he was German or Austrian was based solely on the title "Baron," which to my knowledge doesn't exist in Britain. (I'm also assuming that the good baron attended Durmstrang in his youth. How he ended up at Hogwarts is anybody's guess.) So now we know that Sir Nicholas was a knight. Wonder if that ties in with the suits of armor in the hallways. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 18:35:36 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 18:35:36 -0000 Subject: Potters WAS CHAPTER DISCUSSION chapter 6 In-Reply-To: <20031129215729.17825.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86169 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, KT Waters wrote: > Carol: > > "Again, maybe the connection to both the Potters and the Snapes is > through Sirius's mother's line, which wouldn't show up on a chart > showing only the "Noble and Most Ancient House of Black"--his father's > side of the family." > > > I don't know whether this is true or not. I mean we don't know anything about James's family really, except that both his parents are dead. > > I know this because, Harry was born when Lily and James were about 20 or something, and then they died one year later. When Harry was attacked (aka he got the scar) there were no living relatives except the Dursleys. This means Jameses parents are dead obviously. It also means they died within 6 years of each other, because Sirius quotes that when he ran away in his last year at Hogwarts, he stayed with Mr and Mrs Potter. > > It isn't unusual for couples to die with 6 years of each other, but i am thinking perhaps they could not have been that old. Okay, sothe average couple has children at 30, that would only make the Potters 50 when they died. Why would the suddenly die? IMO i think they were murdered by a Death Eater or Voldemort because they are Gryffindors heirs, and then it was James and Lily and they were killed and now its Harry and he will probably be killed too or he will kill Voldemort because Voldemort is Slytherins heir and he is Gryffindor - remember that Gryffindor and Slytherin couldnt live together either and Harry and Voldemort can't. > > Thanks, I welcome critisism. > > Jadeau Carol: I agree that James's parents must have died during the interim between his graduation from Hogwarts and his own death and that in all probability (though there's no canonical evidence yet), they were murdered by Death Eaters. (Maybe that was the great crime that made Severus Snape repent. We just don't know.) I have no opinion on the Gryffindor's heir theory, but the Godric's Hollow connection is interesting. However, my point was simply that if there is a connection between the Snapes and/or Potters and the Blacks as intermarrying purebloods, it could have been on Sirius's mother's side and therefore would not appear on the Black family's ancestral chart, which traces his father's line. Carol From paulag5777 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 18:43:40 2003 From: paulag5777 at yahoo.com (Paula Gaon) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 10:43:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Guarding the Department of Mysteries Message-ID: <20031130184340.24514.qmail@web40004.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86170 30Nov03 Kate wrote: ... if the Order was guarding the Department of Mysteries, where was the guard the night Harry et al broke in? Why was there no guard stationed at the door that night?... Paula now: This has always puzzled me too. But more to the point, who is that cool female voice that admits everyone into the MM? Who has given her authority, whoever she is, just to let people enter the MM only after hearing a voice over that bewitched phone. A little too trusting, isn't it. IMHO, she, the cool female voice, will come to light as a significant character. ~Paula Gaon --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 18:50:12 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 18:50:12 -0000 Subject: Squibs verses Muggles In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86171 KT Waters wrote: > << Well a Squib is a non-magic person born to magic parents. So they > are non-magic. Non-magic people are Muggles. A squib is just a type of > muggle, so a Squib would only live an average of 76 years I think it > is, whereas a wizard - I don't know, 150 years? >> Catlady responded > > I don't think that a Squib is the same as a Muggle -- the two Squibs > we've met, Filch and Figg, have special communication with their cats. > > In addition, Hogwarts is enchanted so that any Muggle who blunders > upon it sees just an old ruin with a "Danger, Keep Out" sign, but > Filch finds his way around Hogwarts. It has been suggested that Squibs > innately are not affected by Muggle-repelling spells because of not > being Muggles. Excellent point. I just want to add that squibs can apparently see Dementors. We have no reason to suspect Mrs. Figg of lying on that point. There also appears to be a possibility that a squib can learn magic. Filch is apparently trying to do so, though not with much success. I think, though, that Mrs. Figg will find that she's been mistaken all this time about her own abilities and will prove to be the person who learns magic late in life mentioned in a JKR interivew. In that case, though, maybe she'll cease to be a squib. Maybe a squib is just a witch or wizard is just a witch or wizard in whom the magical ability is so weak or faint that he or she appears to be little different from a muggle. Those who choose to live as muggles with no connection to the magical world marry muggles and have muggle children; those who maintain a connection to the WW even after marrying a muggle (Mrs. Figg) still have the potential of discovering the latent magic within themselves. I know I'm only speculating, but I do think there's an important difference between squibs and muggles. (Someone, I think it was Hermione, pointed out that a squib is the opposite of a muggle-born witch or wizard and is much more rare.) Carol From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sun Nov 30 18:54:23 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 18:54:23 -0000 Subject: Too many concepts, not enough books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86172 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "adollarandfiftycent" wrote: > Hi, > > Because I'm still pretty new, I was reading through the Lexicon (an > amazing piece of work). I couldn't believe how many characters, > magical devices and spells there are in the Potter world. I couldn't > figure out a way to count the number of characters (does anyone > know?), but I don't see how even the major characters could possibly > be developed in just the two remaining books. > > Maybe it is a matter of personal preference, but I would think that > good literature doesn't introduce a character unless that character > will have a purpose and will be developed. I am starting to think > Rowling may be forgetting that principle, if it is a principle. > > Any thoughts? > > Fifty Hickengruendler: That isn't true for the Harry Potter books. There are many characters, who don't need any development, especially the random Hogwarts students, and with that I mean everybody except the sextet from the DoM, the other Weasley children (no longer at Hogwarts) and Draco Malfoy. They just add to the flair. It's like the people you met at school, but never really get to know them. It would be unrealistic, if there weren't such characters. The same is true for every staff member except Dumbledore, McGonagall, Hagrid, Snape, Trelawney and the DaDA teachers (and maybe Filch, depending what part he will play). The other characters are just there, because they belong to the school setting, but they aren't important. Random Death Eaters and Order members are also unimportant. They are just named, so that we know that there are more characters involved in this war, than Harry and his closest friends. But there is no need to develop them. Many other characters from the Lexicon are just mentioned in the books, like Regulus Black. Hickengruendler From MadameSSnape at aol.com Sun Nov 30 18:55:23 2003 From: MadameSSnape at aol.com (MadameSSnape at aol.com) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 13:55:23 EST Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's ideal ending & my idea of a horrible ending Message-ID: <1ed.1486276e.2cfb971b@aol.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86173 In a message dated 11/30/2003 12:43:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk writes: And if Rowling cried when Black died, she won't live with herself if she kills Harry Potter himself. She would be saying "evil has won" and that just won't happen. Not necessarily. If Harry dies like King Arthur, destroying Voldemort in the process as Arthur destroyed Mordred, then evil does not win. And JKR doesn't have to put up with being pressured to write "Harry Potter and the Midlife Crisis", "Harry Potter and the Receding Hairline", and "Harry Potter and the Viagra Prescription". Sherrie [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 19:07:13 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 19:07:13 -0000 Subject: Twitchy, prowling Snape? In-Reply-To: <1db.158cb918.2cfb09df@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86174 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, IAmLordCassandra at a... wrote: > In a message dated 11/30/2003 12:28:12 AM Pacific Standard Time, > silent_ghost227 at y... writes: > > > Hmmm, I believe that Snape was nervous as a teenager, used to > > suffering curses and hexes, as opposed to casting them, when he > > reached adulthood. He wasn't well liked, and perhaps that didn't help > > the 'twitchiness' at all. Though one wonders, in regard to the theory > > of the death-eaters effect on him, what, besides the obvious reasons, > > drew him to Voldemort? He regrets it now. What did Voldy offer him > > that he thought so important? > > > > Back to the topic at hand, I believe he is more sure of himself as an > > adult, hence the change in the way he moves. > > Me (Cassie): > > I've been thinking about this a lot. Well, actually, I've been thinking > about Young!Snape crying in the corner--but this is in the same vein XP > > I think this adds to my own theory. Ever since I read the passage in > Occlumency where Snape describes weak people I've wondered if he's speaking from > personal experience. An awkward outcast crying in the corner would seem like the > weak people he's so venomous towards. > > ~Cassie~ IIRC he was about five years old in the memory where he's cowering in the corner as his father abuses his mother, though perhaps the cruel nickname Snivellus indicates that he still cried at age eleven or so when the Gryffindors bullied him--until the gang of Slytherins came to his defense. We see him as an awkward outcast after his friends have left the school, but no longer a crybaby at that point. I think you may be onto something, though, in that he made himself strong out of resentment of the abuse he received as a boy. However much anger he still harbors, there is no awkwardness in him now--and no "snivelling." Regarding his treatment of Neville, whom he probably perceives as weak, maybe he thinks that such treatment will make him stronger. It would be interesting to see an increased mutual respect between them in the later books, but I doubt that it will happen. Carol Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 19:22:29 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 19:22:29 -0000 Subject: Harry's ideal ending & my idea of a horrible ending In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86175 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Diana" wrote: > It occured to me that the ideal ending to book seven from Harry's > point of view might just be to be a normal teenage wizard. He might > not be an auror, or headmaster or famous Quiddith player. He might > be quite happy being just Harry, with no prophecy hanging over his > head anymore, no more Voldemort nightmares, no more weight of the > world on his shoulders. Carol: I'm sure you're quite right that all he wants is to be "Just Harry." That would also be my ideal ending. However, I don't think it's at all incompatible with being an auror, which is the only ambition he's expressed. I'd like to see all three of the Trio as aurors (evil won't end with the destruction of Voldemort). Or maybe Hermione will become a bureaucrat at the MoM and straighten out all the "Fudged" regulations. Diana: > And no more having to live with the Dursleys! He wouldn't need > their protection anymore so he could go where he liked. He could > live with the Weasleys, which I'm sure would be his first choice, or > possibly even the Grangers, if Hermione set it up. He'd be 17 by > the end of book seven, so maybe he'd even live on his own or rent a > place with Ron, provided he had something to do for a living. Carol: Actually, he'll turn seventeen during the summer before he enters Hogwarts for his seventeenth year, meaning he'll be "of age" during almost the entire seventh book. No more worries about the Restriction of Underage Magic. Maybe he'll inherit Sirius's other house, not Grimmauld Place but the one Sirius inherited from his uncle. Diana: > I saw an interview with JKR on Biography where she said she had > the epilogue to the series already written. This tells me that > she's already decided everyone's fate, their careers, their spouses, > etc. (if she uses the epilogue for that purpose and goes that far > ahead in time, that is). Carol: Yes, it's pretty clear that she knows everyone's fate and that the Epilogue will spell everything out (eliminating the need for speculation by readers and an eighth book from her). One of Harry's friends, we know, will become a teacher at Hogwarts--no Ron and probably not Hermione ("It's not who you think"--sorry--quoting from memory) so it's probably Neville. Anyway, I'd like to see Neville marry Ginny and Ron marry Hermione (imagine *their* brood of red-headed children), which pretty much leaves Harry with Luna. I don't care about the SHIPS, though, really--just a settled, normal life for Harry and a family of his own. That's the reward I think he wants and deserves. Carol From lhuntley at fandm.edu Sun Nov 30 19:25:33 2003 From: lhuntley at fandm.edu (Laura Ingalls Huntley) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:25:33 -0500 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Harry's ideal ending & my idea of a horrible ending In-Reply-To: <1ed.1486276e.2cfb971b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86176 Jadeau: > And if Rowling cried when Black died, she won't live with herself if > she > kills Harry Potter himself. She would be saying "evil has won" and > that just won't > happen. Sherrie: > Not necessarily. If Harry dies like King Arthur, destroying Voldemort > in the > process as Arthur destroyed Mordred, then evil does not win. And JKR > doesn't > have to put up with being pressured to write "Harry Potter and the > Midlife > Crisis", "Harry Potter and the Receding Hairline", and "Harry Potter > and the > Viagra Prescription". Oh, I wouldn't say the ending of the King Arthur legend is particularly in the "good triumphs over evil, period" vein. Personally, I found it rather depressing. The ray of hope, IMO, came from the promise that Arthur would return. Which he never did. *feels horribly betrayed* But I agree that the tales of Arthur and Harry follow a similar "Epic Tale" formula. I'm really too lazy to go into the details, but you can see the same themes in Star Wars, the Bible, etc. The fact that Arthur never did actually return is, IMO, an aberration from the normal life arc of an Epic Hero. Especially considering all the symbols of life, rebirth, and resurrection that JKR has surrounded Harry with (for details, see the early posts of the Stoned!Harry theory, which I spent about an hour looking for, but Yahoomort just wouldn't cooperate, so good luck), I very much doubt that she will kill him flat out and end the story. It just doesn't make sense. On the other hand, I'm a pessimist, and I don't really trust Jo enough not to half-expect her to "go for the pain," and kill Harry off in some deep and meaningful way. *rolls eyes* Personally, I hope he lives. I know it *can* be done well, but most main-character-dies-heroically-and-finds-a-better-place endings just leave me with a sense of melodrama. Furthermore, killing someone off for the sake of convenience or not knowing what else to do with them is *not*, IMHO, good writing. Plus, doesn't he just *deserve* a chance at a normal, happy life? Yes? Please? Laura (who spent a large portion of her *very* young childhood waiting patiently for King Arthur to return . . . until she realized that it was just a legend and, anyway, he was English.) From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 30 14:39:19 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:39:19 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Re: Titled characters (WAS Voldemort's "lordship") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031130143919.83634.qmail@web60001.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86177 >Christian says >This made me curious - I do not recall ever seeing anything in the >books pointing in any particular direction regarding the Bloody >Baron's nationality, but I can easily have missed something. What in >the books made you think he is German or Austrian? Jadeau says: (me) xxx Nothing pointed it out, but I guessed it too. it's just Baron is more Austrian or German. In England or Scotland there are more Lords and Earls and Dukes. --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 19:36:51 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 19:36:51 -0000 Subject: Titled characters (aka Sir Nick) In-Reply-To: <016601c3b77b$eb469e00$a6706751@kathryn> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86178 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Kathryn Cawte" wrote: > Jadeau xxx > > > So? It doesn't mean there aren't any. I mean, write that story in a muggle > world, set in a muggle boarding school and with the muggle government. In > the government there are no lords - also there are none in the MOM. > Presumably Sir Nicholas was knighted by King Ethelred or whoever was king at > the time in England when he was alive (sorry I can't remember) for doing > something muggleishy worthy, then they guessed he was a 'witch' (was > witch-burning aorund then? I thought it was Christian-burning) and cut his > head off? Or is this out of date thinking about it? > > > > Surely beheading people didn't start this early on? Hanging was popular I > suppose but as far as I know if the Saxons wanted you dead the would ... > wait hang on, sorry about that. > > > > You could be: stoned, beheaded, hung, burnt, drowned or have your neck > broken for being any of the following: a traitor, an outlaw, a witch, a > wizard or a theif. > > > > So if Nick was one of these and a Knight? So he did something good and > then some magic, or what? Please can someone enlighten me on the answer. > > > > > > K > > Well for a start you've moved the poor guy nearly 500 years back in time! > 1492 is Henry VII and 7 years after the end of the Wars of the Roses, not > anything to do with Saxons at all. We didn't really have large-scale witch > burning in this country anyway and I'm fairly certain that what there was > was confined to peasants not Knights of the realm. He could well have > received a knighthood for services to the crown in the Wars of the Roses or > maybe just for coming to the King's attention in some other way. Beheading > was the traditional punishment for anyone of any importance anyway so Sir > Nick would have likely been beheaded regardless of his 'crime'. Botched > beheading wasn't at all uncommon either btw. As a Knight he would most > likely have been beheaded for some kind of treason - but since treason can > be roughly translated as 'annoying the reigning monarch in some way' that > doesn't help much either. > > K Yes, Henry VII was rather fond of beheading people, especially if they had Yorkist connections. Sir Nick could have been involved in the Perkin Warbeck plot, for example--or suspected of it. Alternatively, he might have been suspected of being a wizard and framed for alleged involvement in one of the many plots against "the Tydder" (Richard III's name for Henry Tudor before the Battle of Bosworth Field). Carol, who hopes that Sir Nick wore his roses white From evankimjeff at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 15:38:31 2003 From: evankimjeff at yahoo.com (KIM MACKLIN) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 07:38:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Crouch killing Harry Message-ID: <20031130153831.8902.qmail@web14906.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86179 Hi all: I am rereading GoF for the 3rd time now, and have just gotten past the 1st challenge. Anyway, I think I have missed something here, I don't remember in the first 2 readings Crouch planning to kill Harry. I always thought his objective was to deliver Harry to Voldy. I scanned through and could not find a page. Can someone help? Kim [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 30 15:54:07 2003 From: ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk (ladyramkin2000) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 15:54:07 -0000 Subject: ReL Titled characters Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86180 There is a once-famous novel by (I think) Bulwer Lytton, called The Last of the Barons, dealing with Warwick the Kingmaker. The Bloody Baron sounds as though he would fit in particularly well in this blood-stained period, The Wars of the Roses. I'm convinced he was English. Sylvia From kate_bag at hotmail.com Sun Nov 30 18:22:23 2003 From: kate_bag at hotmail.com (dj_bagshaw) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 18:22:23 -0000 Subject: Is Peeves a Ghost? was Re: Wizard to ghost? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86181 "meriaugust" wrote: > Here's a question that popped into my head while reading the posts > about titles in the WW. People were discussing Nearly Headless Nick > and why he is refered to as "sir" ie: what had he done to get > himself a title and then what had happened to lead to his beheading. > Someone suggested that he perhaps had been discovered to be a wizard > and was executed for that, but is there any canon evidence to > confirm that every Hogwarts ghost (or every ghost in the world for > that matter) was a witch or wizard in life? Moaning Myrtle of course > was a Hogwarts stuident, and Professor Binns was boring students > there for years before his death, but what about Nick and the Fat > Friar and the Bloody Baron and the Grey Lady? All magical (non- > Muggle) people in life? Or is Hogwarts merely a haven for ghosts > regardless of magical status in life? Did the person have to have > some Hogwarts connection before they haunt there? What about the > muggles who become ghosts, if any? Do they fall under the > jurisdiction of the MoM or are they stuck with figuring out their > post-biological existence on their own? Any thoughts? Yes, there is *very* clear canon evidence of this... At the end of OoP, when Harry seeks out Nearly Headless Nick to ask whether Sirius will become a ghost... Nearly Headless Nick hesitated, then said, "not everyone can come back as a ghost." "What d'you mean?" said Harry quickly. "Only...only wizards." (UK ed p 758) So you see, all Hogwarts ghosts *must* have been wizards before. One other question though...I was rereading PS last night, and discovered an interesting passage about Peeves: "He gives us all a bad name and you know, he's not really even a ghost" At this point, the speaker/ghost, who isn;t identified but whose description seems to fit that of Nearly Headless Nick, gets *interrupted* (and we all know what interruptions mean...) So, ny question is, why is Peeves not really even a ghost? Is this important, or was the speaker merely saying that Peeves didn't *act* like a proper ghost? Is the distinction between ghost and poltergiest (which I belive Peeves is mentioned as) so great that he isn't considered a ghost? Any thoughts? ~Kate From june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk Sun Nov 30 20:04:56 2003 From: june.diamanti at blueyonder.co.uk (junediamanti) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:04:56 -0000 Subject: Is Snape confident was:Re: spoiler warning: Twitchy, prowling Snape? In-Reply-To: <3FC9F344.7060404@cantab.net> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86182 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, Angel Moules wrote: > The impression that > we're given of SS is similar. He's had a miserable childhood, and rather > than trusting the Headmaster he's seen at a distance, he goes with what > he knows how to do, and where he thinks he will be valued. > > The DEs at first let him think he's valuable, until he starts to realise > he's only as good as the next potion, the next kill. Whatever artificial > confidence he has been given deserts him, and he's left even worse off > than he was before. Dumbledore finds him, and rescues him, and > infuses him with the confidence that is needed. June: There is no canon evidence that Dumbledore "found and rescued" Snape from the DE. The evidence we do have comes rather from the remark made by DD in GOF which implies that Snape left the DE of his own volition. There have been a number of possible ideas on this board - they're all good, and I'm not going to fully re-hash them here. I really do recommend anyone who is new to SnapeTheory to the FAQ and Fantastic posts available here - if nothing else, you are guaranteed an entertaining read. These are the main reasons I can remember why Snape might have left the DE - and theory owners will hopefully forgive me for not using the appropriate acronyms or getting them wrong in some detail: 1. LOLLIPOPS - don't ask me to remember precisely what the letters stand for - but essentially, it posits that Snape had secretly loved Lily Evans since their school days - his failure to get her was a factor in his joining the DE but when he discovered that Voldemort's plans for the Potter family involved their death, then he turned to the one person who might be able to prevent this - Dumbledore (I must declare an interest here and state that I believe this to be true). 2. BIG BANG - some other major defining moment and including the above which impelled Snape to change sides. 3. GEORGE (correct me if I am wrong here) - no big bang, no love blight, just an intellectual decision that the DE was the wrong side to be on. I dispute this, because it presumes a cool level headed Severus at the age of 20 which I do not believe his known backstory suggests. Snape was IMHO too f****d up by then to be a cool Lenin type. As to where he got his confidence from, I've chewed this one over on a number of other boards and some of the conclusions are not repeatable here (more's the pity ). However, I suspect the change came over time. He survived a lot. Crap childhood, lousy adolescence, being a member of a terrorist organisation, changing sides and risking his life on a daily basis as a double agent, spy whatever, and if he WAS in love with Lily, the events at Godrics Hollow must have been a bit cataclysmic for him too. Whether or not that was an issue, I suspect he was the person who advised DD that the Potters were a target - and the failure of the order to protect them cannot have been a pleasant experience for him either. I believe it is his survival skills that have given him confidence. I speak from personal experience of bad times here and say that whatever does not kill you makes you stronger - so it was for him. > Against someone who really has confidence, Snape is shown up as a > fraud. For example, take a look at the film, where you get a shot of > Lucius and SS watching Quidditch. LM is poised, SS is twitchy, edgy by > contrast. June: Please do not take the film to be canon. As I recall, there is no evidence in the books of Lucius being at the Quidditch matches. Nor is there any proof that Snape is "twitchy" either. Yet he still has an air of effortless malevolence, June: Not in my 'umble opinion. Pickyness, irritability, bad-temper and sheer bloody mindedness seem to be his stock in trade as a teacher. Effortless malevolence seems more the province of the villians in LOTR - see Sauron for instance, or Morgoth in the Silmarillion. As a baddy - he's just not in their league, sorry. that is > intensified by the presence of his one-time mentor. June: Yet again, we do not know for certain that his one time mentor is Lucius -I presume you mean Lucius, do you? For what it is worth, I personally believe Lucius may well have been pivotal in Snape's being drawn to the DE cause, but I have no real evidence for that, apart from Sirius's rather waspish comment, when he and Snape have their little face-off in the kitchen at 12 Grimmauld Place, in OOP. "Lucius Malfoy's lapdog". > On the other hand, we see Snape with AD at the beginning of Snape II, > and there he is confident, the strength is drawn from AD. He is > cowed slightly by being told that the matter of expulsion is not in his > hands, but he keeps a poise there. June: Snape both wants to get rid of Harry and also just to put the sweats up him. I would in his place too. I suspect he knows very well that Harry won't be expelled at that point, but at then, Harry and Ron are caught in a major rule breaking situation - if I was their teacher, I'd certainly want to put some major frighteners on them at the very least, as I would as a parent if my daughter got up to similar stunts. Taking a "Snape-ish" line can be very helpful to any parent dealing with an out-of-order teenager you know! His confidence is his own and is introduced in his own personal chapter in PS/SS "The Potions Master" - as I remember roughly - "he spoke in almost a whisper and did not need to raise his voice to get the class to pay attention" now I remember teachers like this from my own schooldays and can say with absolute certainty that they were ALL confident. Snape is confident. June Keen Snape-apologist. From pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no Sun Nov 30 20:23:44 2003 From: pengolodh_sc at yahoo.no (pengolodh_sc) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:23:44 -0000 Subject: Titled characters (WAS Voldemort's "lordship") In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86184 --- In HPforGrownups, "Geoff Bannister" wrote: [snip] > Christian Stub?: > > 1. A Baroness is a wife of a Baron, so I don't expect > > Baronesses to be significantly more common or rare than > > Barons. > > Geoff: > You may well be right that Barons are often styled "Lord" but > you have overlooked that a Baroness can also be "A woman > holding the rank of baron". Quite what the parameters for this > to occur are, I cannot say. Either she has been granted the title by the Queen (inwhich case it is normally a life peerage these days), or else she has the distinction of holding one of the relatively few hereditary titles which are not inheritable only by males - most peerage-titles are inherited through exclusively male primogeny, and if no male heir can be found, then such titles become extinct. As for the title of Lord, any male peer - be he a Baron, a Scots Lord of the Parliament (the only rank where Lord is an inherent part of the title, to distinguish it from the Scots Feudal Baronies, which are a different thing from the Baronies of England, Wales, and Ireland towhich the Lords of Parliament are equals), a Viscount, an Earl, a Marquess, or a Duke - is a Lord - by courtesy (in the case of Barons, Viscounts, Marquesses, or Dukes) or by inheritance. Dukes are formally addressed "Your grace" or "My Grace", so the term isn't heard quite as often in reference to them, but nevertheless it is so. --- In HPforGrownups, Carol wrote: [snip] > Thanks for the information. My thought that he was German or > Austrian was based solely on the title "Baron," which to my > knowledge doesn't exist in Britain. (I'm also assuming that > the good baron attended Durmstrang in his youth. How he ended > up at Hogwarts is anybody's guess.) --- In HPforGrownups, KT Waters wrote: > Nothing pointed it out, but I guessed it too. it's just Baron > is more Austrian or German. In England or Scotland there are > more Lords and Earls and Dukes. In Germany, I think you will find "Freiherr" being at least as common as Baron - and the rank of Baron stems from France originally, and came to Britain with the Norman invasion. As I pointed out in an earlier post, the rank of Baron is by far the most common in the English, Scots, British, Irish, and UK peerages, outnumbering all other titles counted together. Barons in fact outnumber Earls and Dukes by nearly 3 to 1 (and they outnumber Dukedoms alone by somewhere around 28 to 1). As such, I still see nothing to point at the Bloody Baron not being British. I think it is also unlikely that the House Ghost of Slytherin was not originally himself a Slytherin, or at the least once a Hogwarts student - I believe Durmstrang's ghost tend to stick to Durmstrang. Best regards Christian Stub? From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 20:31:37 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:31:37 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86185 -> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" wrote: > > > > You didn't mention me, Kneasy, but I think I'm the one who brought up > > the topic. In any case, I also have no interest in or connection with > > New Age or "touch-feely" theories. I simply think that the distinction > > between good and evil must be maintained and that Harry must not > > succumb to the temptation to kill or inflict pain for pleasure. He > > must not become Voldemort's pupil like Bellatrix. The Unforgiveable > > Curses are unforgiveable for a reason, and I can't see JKR changing > > the rules and allowing him and his friends to use them. He must find > > some other way to kill Voldemort, either by causing Voldemort's own > > spell to backfire, or, if you prefer, in a fair, heroic, by-the-rule > > fight using Godric Gryffindor's sword. Maybe that's the reason the > > sword was introduced in the first place. > > > > Carol, who also thinks that Fawkes the Phoenix will somehow be involved > > > OK, Carol, sorry to have ignored you in my blanket swipe at those who > I consider are being unnecessarily squeamish. Consider yourself included. Thanks, but please understand that I don't think Voldemort is going to be killed by an act of mercy or love. If anything, those are the forces that protect Harry against him. > > No, Harry's Crucio! in the MoM wasn't very successful because he hadn't done > it before. When has he ever got a spell right first time? Bella was playing > mind games. Carol: You still haven't answered Geoff's argument http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/85985 regarding the canonical evidence against having good guys use the unforgiveable curses. Surely they are unforgiveable and illegal for a reason, and, if so, JKR will need to provide some alternative to having Harry perform a curse that would send him to Azkaban. I don't think she believes that "all's fair in love and war" and that she will put herself in the tricky situation of having defined the rules and then decided to change them. She has clearly established a distinction between good and evil in the WW and it seems to me that she needs to maintain it. Geoff's quotations illustrate that distinction quite clearly, as do certain statements by Dumbledore that I will hunt up if necessary when I have more time. JKR has said in an interview that Dumbledore is "the epitome of goodness," http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/quickquotes/articles/2000/0700-cbc-solomon.htm which I hope is sufficient evidence that his assertions matter in thies discussion. Kneasy: > No, it'll be *me* that takes pleasure in Voldy coming to a sticky end. > Harry will just feel relief, as will everybody else in the WW. Carol: Exactly. > > Fair fight is out. Voldy will never fight fair. Fawkes and the sword have > already been used once, and when does JKR repeat plot devices for the > resolution of crises? The wands won't work; the conflict occurs at *both* > ends, not just with Harry. I agree that the wands won't work, but I have nothing against Harry being healed a second time by Phoenix tears. And I never said that Voldemort would fight fairly, only that Harry should. The moment Voldemort raises a wand or other weapon against him or a friend, Harry has the right and responsibility to fight defensively. That's what DADA is for; Hogwarts, unlike Durmstrang, does not teach the Dark Arts themselves, only *defense* against them. So Harry must find a way to destroy Voldemort without resorting to Dark weapons, including unforgiveable curses, himself. I have never said that he should take pity on Voldemort, much less love his enemy. I have only said that he must not muddy the distinction between good (Dumbledore) and evil (Voldemort) that JKR herself has established. You may be right about Bellatrix's comments being a red herring, but I don't think so. She and Voldemort appear to enjoy inflicting pain and death. If, indeed, that feeling is required to make the curses effective, then the reason they're "unforgiveable" is clear. They can be cast only by someone who is already cruel and well on his or her way to becoming irreversibly evil. Carol, who hopes that you'll quote canon this time instead of calling those who disagree with you "touchy-feely New Agers." We just don't share your view of a satisfactory ending. And BTW, it won't hurt your argument to concede a few points. :-) From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 20:45:24 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:45:24 -0000 Subject: Bang! You're Dead. (was:Voldemorts animus...) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86186 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Berit Jakobsen" wrote: > Kneazy wrote: > > Harry didn't seem to suffer from any moral misgivings when faced with > Sirius in the Shrieking Shack, so why should he with Voldemort, the > beast that zapped his parents? > > Berit responds: > > Well, Harry seemed to suffer some kind of moral misgivings, didn't > he? Why else would he hesitate in killing Sirius? In CoS p. 251 > (Bloomsbury) we see Harry arguing with himself, trying to justify his > urge of killing Sirius. He raised his wand, but Harry remained frozen > in that position. The seconds ticked... The truth is he couldn't > bring himself to do it. Afterwards Harry is momentarily disappointed > with himself for "losing his nerve". But why did he lose his nerve? I > think it's because, fortunately, killing doesn't come easily to a > normal human being. So yes; Harry hesitating shows he did have moral > misgivings... > > And then we also see Harry actively preventing Lupin and Sirius from > killing Peter. Reason? He reckoned his dad wouldn't have wanted his > best friends to become killers just for Peter... Again emphasizing > what makes killing so ugly: It's not about it being so "bad" to kill > a baddie, but the problem is more what it does to the person doing > the killing. Peter wasn't worth Lupin and Sirius becoming killers... > I find that interesting. > > Just a little "sidetracking", but an important one I think :-) > > Berit Exactly. Imagine the consequences *to Sirius* if he had succeeded in murdering Peter as he set out to do. Aside from being sent back to Azkaban (assuming that he escaped the Dementors), what kind of relationship could he have had with Harry? It was the thought of his innocence that sustained him for twelve years in Azkaban. What could he have thought of himself once he got beyond the moment of fierce satisfaction at having accomplished his revenge? Much better to allow him at least a little time to heal rather than adding guilt and remorse to his already heavy burdens. Much better to let him die heroically in battle with his Amazon cousin (and pass beyond the Veil) than live with the pollution of murder on his mind and soul. Carol, who believes that laws exist in the WW as in the RW not only to prevent endless bloody cycles of revenge and retribution but to prevent ordinary citizens from indulging in vigilante "justice," which would result in anarchy for society and moral pollution for the vigilantes From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 21:01:51 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:01:51 -0000 Subject: Titled characters (WAS Voldemort's "lordship") In-Reply-To: <163.29105d42.2cfb77cd@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86187 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, MadameSSnape at a... wrote: > In a message dated 11/30/2003 8:17:26 AM Eastern Standard Time, > gbannister10 at a... writes: > Geoff: > Speaking as a UK resident, my comment would be that the title Baron > is fairly rare - Baronet and also Baroness is not. Earl, Lord and > Duke are reasonably common and the wife of an Earl, for example, > might be styled Countess. > > +++++++++++++ > > Sherrie here: > > Is this in modern Britain, or historical Britain? Was the title of "Baron" > more common during earlier centuries (I'm thinking 12th or 13th - Henry > II/Richard I)? According to Burke's (online at > http://www.burkes-peerage.net/sites/peerage/sitepages/page66-baron.asp): > > "baron: holder of lowest rank of dignity, called a barony, in the peerage (2) > of England, Great Britain, Ireland or United Kingdom (but almost never of > Scotland, for which see lord). > Somehow, I've always pictured the Bloody Baron as hailing ca. Magna Carta, or > maybe earlier - sometime in the early Plantagenet years, at all events. Not > as late as Sir Nick... if you'll pardon the pun. > > Sherrie I think you're right. IIRC, the signers of the Magna Carta were referred to as barons. So if the Bloody Baron is British, he would have to date from the Norman era or earlier. I'm not aware of any British barons in the fifteenth century; they were all dukes, earls, and lords (perhaps technically barons but not referred to as such). Now if we knew the Bloody Baron's name or had heard him speak, a guess at his nationality would be easier. I still think that if he were British, he would be styled as a lord, not a baron. He also strikes me as having a kind of Gothic/Durmstrang air about him, appropriate to the ghost of Slytherin, whereas Sir Nick is what Elizabeth I would call "pure English" and undoubtedly graduated from Hogwarts. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 21:06:28 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:06:28 -0000 Subject: Squibs verses Muggles In-Reply-To: <20031130140205.67319.qmail@web60005.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86188 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, KT Waters wrote: > > >This has been pointed out > >on list and suggested (sorry, I don't remember by whom) that > >communication with cats in an innate Squib trait that Muggles don't >have. > >Carol Carol: Please be more careful in your attributions. I didn't say this. Carol From hickengruendler at yahoo.de Sun Nov 30 21:11:42 2003 From: hickengruendler at yahoo.de (hickengruendler) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:11:42 -0000 Subject: Is Peeves a Ghost? was Re: Wizard to ghost? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86190 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dj_bagshaw" wrote: > > So, ny question is, why is Peeves not really even a ghost? Is this > important, or was the speaker merely saying that Peeves didn't *act* > like a proper ghost? Is the distinction between ghost and > poltergiest (which I belive Peeves is mentioned as) so great that he > isn't considered a ghost? > > Any thoughts? > > ~Kate Hickengruendler: Peeves is a poltergeist, not a ghost. A poltergeist never lived. I am sure there are people here, who can explain better what exactly a poltergeist is and why it "exists" (in fantasy world, of course). But a poltergeist was never a living person, it's more sort of a creature. That's why Peeves can touch all these things, while the ghosts just glide through it. Hickengruendler From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 30 20:45:31 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:45:31 -0000 Subject: Genetics, descent and Re: Mark Evans In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86191 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Geoff Bannister" Geoff: Sorry, I need to answer myself!!! In 86157, I wrote... Geoff: > Responding to a further comment made by a different poster regarding > Mark's age: in the UK, a child would enter the First Year (presentday > Year 7) if their 11th birthday fell between 1st September and 31st > August of the previous school year. So, if Harry's comments to Dudley > were late in July, Mark would appear in Hogwarts when Harry was > entering his 6th year in September 1996. Me again: [permissible this time I think :-) ] What I should have written was: Mark would appear in Hogwarts when Harry was entering his 6th year in September 1996 assuming that Mark's eleventh birthday fell on or after 01/09/95. Apologies for any confusion. Geoff From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 30 20:53:54 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:53:54 -0000 Subject: Too many concepts, not enough books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86192 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "adollarandfiftycent" wrote: Fifty: > Hi, > > Because I'm still pretty new, I was reading through the Lexicon (an > amazing piece of work). I couldn't believe how many characters, > magical devices and spells there are in the Potter world. I couldn't > figure out a way to count the number of characters (does anyone > know?), but I don't see how even the major characters could possibly > be developed in just the two remaining books. > > Maybe it is a matter of personal preference, but I would think that > good literature doesn't introduce a character unless that character > will have a purpose and will be developed. I am starting to think > Rowling may be forgetting that principle, if it is a principle. Geoff: I wouldn't agree. Look at the number of minor characters in LOTR fo example who only get a minor mention in the books - Glorfindel and Haldir come to mind. There are a number of names in HP who haven't gone much beyond a brief mention; some of the young people mentioned in the Sorting Ceremony and Professor Sinistra to quote but a handful. Of course, some of these may get off the substitute's bench and into the action in Books 6/7 but at the moment, they're twiddling their thumbs. Geoff From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 30 21:06:20 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:06:20 -0000 Subject: Crouch killing Harry In-Reply-To: <20031130153831.8902.qmail@web14906.mail.yahoo.com> Message-ID: --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, KIM MACKLIN wrote: Kim: > Hi all: > > I am rereading GoF for the 3rd time now, and have just gotten past the 1st challenge. Anyway, I think I have missed something here, I don't remember in the first 2 readings Crouch planning to kill Harry. I always thought his objective was to deliver Harry to Voldy. I scanned through and could not find a page. Can someone help? > Geoff: Good old canon again.... "'The Dark Lord didn't manage to kill you, Potter, and he /so/ wanted to,' whispered Moody. 'Imagine how he will reward me when he finds I have done it for him. I gave you to him - the thing he needed above all to regenerate - and then I killed you for him. I will be honoured beyond all other Death Eaters. I will be his dearest, his closest supporter.... closer than a son...' Moody's normal eye was bulging, the magical eye fixed upon Harry. The door was barred and Harry knew he would never reach his own wand in time." (GOF chapter "Veritaserum", pp. 588/9 UK edition) I think the original objective /was/ to deliver Harry but when Harry escaped using the Portkey, Moody decided that he would eliminate Harry. Geoff From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 21:35:36 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:35:36 -0000 Subject: Too many concepts, not enough books? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86194 -> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Because I'm still pretty new, I was reading through the Lexicon (an > > amazing piece of work). I couldn't believe how many characters, > > magical devices and spells there are in the Potter world. I > couldn't > > figure out a way to count the number of characters (does anyone > > know?), but I don't see how even the major characters could possibly > > be developed in just the two remaining books. > > > > Maybe it is a matter of personal preference, but I would think that > > good literature doesn't introduce a character unless that character > > will have a purpose and will be developed. I am starting to think > > Rowling may be forgetting that principle, if it is a principle. > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > Fifty > > Hickengruendler: > > That isn't true for the Harry Potter books. There are many > characters, who don't need any development, especially the random > Hogwarts students, and with that I mean everybody except the sextet > from the DoM, the other Weasley children (no longer at Hogwarts) and > Draco Malfoy. They just add to the flair. It's like the people you > met at school, but never really get to know them. It would be > unrealistic, if there weren't such characters. The same is true for > every staff member except Dumbledore, McGonagall, Hagrid, Snape, > Trelawney and the DaDA teachers (and maybe Filch, depending what part > he will play). The other characters are just there, because they > belong to the school setting, but they aren't important. Random Death > Eaters and Order members are also unimportant. They are just named, > so that we know that there are more characters involved in this war, > than Harry and his closest friends. But there is no need to develop > them. Many other characters from the Lexicon are just mentioned in > the books, like Regulus Black. > > Hickengruendler Yes and no. Certain (mostly dead) authors (Dostoevsky or Dickens, for example) will present a vivid portrait of a minor character only to drop that character from the story. No one has challenged their status as great authors because of this tactic; it was simply their preferred literary style. More recent authors, OTOH, tend to limit the number of characters in part because modern readers expect them to do so. It's hard to keep track of a large number of characters, so we expect a minor character to serve a real purpose in the story. To a surprising extent, JKR's characters DO serve such a purpose. Yes, some of them exist simply to fill up staff positions or to provide Harry and friends with classmates in their own and other houses, without whom the world of Hogwarts would be too limited and too obviously fictional. But more often than not, a name casually dropped turns out to be important later. (Sirius Black is the obvious example.) I don't suppose we'll hear more from Madam Malkin, who existed solely to provide Harry with school robes in his first year, but Dedalus Diggle (mentioned about three times in earlier books) showed up at the beginning of OoP. I expect we'll hear more from him. I certainly hope and expect to learn more about Frank and Alice Longbottom and Neville's gran. For the same reason, I think Mark Evans will prove to be important. When JKR drops a name, we should pay attention. That person will almost certainly have a role to play in later books. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 21:40:32 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:40:32 -0000 Subject: Harry's ideal ending & my idea of a horrible ending In-Reply-To: <1ed.1486276e.2cfb971b@aol.com> Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86195 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, MadameSSnape at a... wrote: > In a message dated 11/30/2003 12:43:38 PM Eastern Standard Time, > eu_amo_tu at y... writes: > And if Rowling cried when Black died, she won't live with herself if she > kills Harry Potter himself. She would be saying "evil has won" and that just won't > happen. > > Not necessarily. If Harry dies like King Arthur, destroying Voldemort in the > process as Arthur destroyed Mordred, then evil does not win. And JKR doesn't > have to put up with being pressured to write "Harry Potter and the Midlife > Crisis", "Harry Potter and the Receding Hairline", and "Harry Potter and the > Viagra Prescription". > > Sherrie True. But killing him off (as so many authors have done before her) would be the easy way out and I don't think JKR will take that route. She already knows who will live and who will die and what happened to all the important characters after VW2. Harry could quite easily be among them. In fact "The Boy Who Lived" suggests that he will. The challenge will be to find a satisfactory way to end the story without having Harry die. And I don't think, based on what we've seen so far, that JKR will let us down--certainly not through the failure of her imagination. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 21:53:11 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:53:11 -0000 Subject: ReL Titled characters In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86196 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ladyramkin2000" wrote: > There is a once-famous novel by (I think) Bulwer Lytton, called The > Last of the Barons, dealing with Warwick the Kingmaker. The Bloody > Baron sounds as though he would fit in particularly well in this > blood-stained period, The Wars of the Roses. I'm convinced he was > English. > Sylvia But Bulwer-Lytton was writing in the 19th-century and not particularly concerned with historical accuracy, which in any case is hard to come by if you're dealing with the fifteenth-century, given that almost everything written in that period reflected a bias (Yorkist, Lancastrian, French, or whatever). But bias aside, I can't think of any contemporary references to Richard Neville, Earl of Warwick, as a baron. (He's usually just "Warwick.") As I said in another post, I think that if the Bloody Baron is indeed English, despite his Gothic aura, he's from an earlier era, possibly the early thirteenth century, which would make him a contemporary of the notorious King John rather than Henry VI or Edward IV. Carol From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 21:58:47 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:58:47 -0000 Subject: Is Peeves a Ghost? was Re: Wizard to ghost? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86197 -"dj_bagshaw" wrote: > > So, ny question is, why is Peeves not really even a ghost? Is this > > important, or was the speaker merely saying that Peeves didn't > *act* > > like a proper ghost? Is the distinction between ghost and > > poltergiest (which I belive Peeves is mentioned as) so great that > he > > isn't considered a ghost? > > > > Any thoughts? > > > > ~Kate > > Hickengruendler: > Peeves is a poltergeist, not a ghost. A poltergeist never lived. I am > sure there are people here, who can explain better what exactly a > poltergeist is and why it "exists" (in fantasy world, of course). But > a poltergeist was never a living person, it's more sort of a > creature. That's why Peeves can touch all these things, while the > ghosts just glide through it. Carol: Right. Peeves isn't silvery, like the "proper" ghosts. He appears to be substantial; he wears a bow tie, throws things at students, writes bad words on the chalk board, and chews gum. Remember Lupin's spell that sent the gum up Peeves's nostril? Imagine attempting that with a ghost. It would go right through him or her, as the diary goes through Moaning Myrtle. Carol From coyoteschild at peoplepc.com Sun Nov 30 22:01:24 2003 From: coyoteschild at peoplepc.com (IggyMcSnurd) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 16:01:24 -0600 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Peeves a Ghost? was Re: Wizard to ghost? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <000101c3b78d$82d477e0$c591aec7@Einstein> No: HPFGUIDX 86198 >Hickengruendler: > >Peeves is a poltergeist, not a ghost. A poltergeist never lived. I am >sure there are people here, who can explain better what exactly a >poltergeist is and why it "exists" (in fantasy world, of course). But >a poltergeist was never a living person, it's more sort of a >creature. That's why Peeves can touch all these things, while the >ghosts just glide through it. Iggy here: Poltergeists are spirits of mischief, sometimes evil and sometimes simply overly annoying. They were never alive, but are often seen as being a manifestation of a predominant "psychic emanation" of the local environment, manifesting to cause troubles and problems in a variety of ways. In the movie "Poltergeist", for example, it was a manifestation of the wrath of the spirits of the dead upon who's graves the house was built. The Poltergeists themselves were not spirits of the dead, rather they were an embodiment of the anger those spirits felt at the desecration of their final resting place. In the HP books, on the other hand, Peeves was probably inadvertently created, and sustained, by all the students who attend, and live at, Hogwarts. All students have a sense of mischief, and pranks that they wish they could play on their teachers and fellow classmates. With so many people in such an area, and for as long as Hogwarts has been around, especially considering that the people residing on the grounds are wizards and witches... All of this has either drawn Peeves to the grounds, or even caused him to be created. (After all, we have never heard of Peeves ever leaving the grounds.) In more mundane aspects of life in our own world, poltergeists are supposed to be either the aforementioned manifestations of a pervading mischievous emotions, or even unconscious use of innate or latent psychic abilities (such as low level telekinesis) in people who seem to be plagued by them. (Some others, of course, have been proven to be hoaxes.) I hope this helps... Iggy McSnurd From justcarol67 at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 22:23:03 2003 From: justcarol67 at yahoo.com (justcarol67) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 22:23:03 -0000 Subject: Good vs. evil in the WW Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86199 I haven't searched out my Dumbledore quotes yet, but here's an excerpt from an interview that I think presents pretty strong evidence that Harry won't *murder* Voldemort using an illegal curse (which is not to say that he won't kill him in self-defense using some other method): JKR: Do you absolutely have a sense of how evil it is to take another person's life? Yes, I think in my book you do. I think you do. I think you see that is a horrific thing. I have enormous respect for human life. . . . I think it's very clear where my sympathies lie. And here we are dealing with someone, I'm dealing with a villain who does hold human life incredibly cheap. That's how it happens: one squeeze of the trigger. Gone. Forever. That's evil. It's a terrible, terrible thing but you're right, I know where I draw the line. [End of quote.] Clearly, based on the values expressed here, Harry can't hold human life, or life in any form, cheaply. He must see killing anyone, even a mass murderer like Voldemort, as "a horrific thing." He cannot make the excuse that Voldemort has ceased to be human. He must kill in self-defense only, because there is no alternative. And he must not take pleasure in the act or in any way resemble Voldemort as he destroys him. He must maintain his moral superiority, his integrity, and his self-respect. Carol From t.forch at mail.dk Sun Nov 30 23:20:58 2003 From: t.forch at mail.dk (Troels Forchhammer) Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 00:20:58 +0100 Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Peeves a Ghost? was Re: Wizard to ghost? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20031130215622.0552b270@pop3.norton.antivirus> No: HPFGUIDX 86200 At 18:22 30-11-03 +0000, dj_bagshaw wrote: >"He gives us all a bad name and you know, he's not really even a >ghost" > >At this point, the speaker/ghost, who isn;t identified but whose >description seems to fit that of Nearly Headless Nick, gets >*interrupted* (and we all know what interruptions mean...) > >So, ny question is, why is Peeves not really even a ghost? Is this >important, or was the speaker merely saying that Peeves didn't *act* >like a proper ghost? Is the distinction between ghost and >poltergiest (which I belive Peeves is mentioned as) so great that he >isn't considered a ghost? In /Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them/ we learn that all creatures are divided into Beings, Beasts and Spirits. Naming one of these groups /Spirits/ tells us that /Ghost/ is possibly (I'd say probably) not a catch-all term for this kind of creatures. That means that it is possible that ghosts and Poltergeists are indeed two different creatures in Potterverse. I discuss the possible differences in my Potterverse FAQ at Hogwarts Library: Troels From eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 30 15:29:11 2003 From: eu_amo_tu at yahoo.co.uk (=?iso-8859-1?q?KT=20Waters?=) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 15:29:11 +0000 (GMT) Subject: [HPforGrownups] CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Luna Lovegood, Chapter 10 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031130152911.83516.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86201 Jadeau: (me) xxx: Okay I am sorry if you have discussed this Chapter before, but I would like to go through it. Firstly, on the first page, we find out that Ginny fell down the stairs and Molly yells that they could have done her a serious injury. This indicates that they didn't. Why then, does Harry still ask if she is okay? Perhaps he cares about her.... in some other way???? There are more things indicating this rather than just the one i have pointed out, but in other chapters. Also, I found it off-putting the way Harry jokes about Voldemort, like on page 164 (UK edition) "I thought Voldemort was supposed to be lying low, or are you telling me he's going to jump out from behind a dustbin and try and do me in?" People have died because of Voldemort, it appears Harry does think he is better then everyone - as Lupin, Bellatrix, Snape and even Malfoy have suggested. Thirdly, Mrs Black shouts "MUDBLOODS" and "WEREWOLVES" quite frequently. How, may I ask, does she know Lupin is a werewolf and Hermione is a mudblood? Is there some way of telling, there must be, Malfoy mentioned it in GOF when they went into the woods didn't he? Can someone explain what it is? On page 166 (UK edition) Moody says "I'll be reporting Stugis to Dumbledore, that's the second time he's not turned up in a week." Is this because he has been arrested? Was it that early on? I thought the report didn't come out for ages? Also on that page, Fred says he has business to discuss with Lee. I would have presumed that this 'business' was to do with the Joke Shop? but Lee wasn't part of it, so what business is it? I found it strange, that it appears in nearly every book, the carriages all seem to be full but one. In the first book Harry and Ron were alone in their compartment, in the third book it was just Lupin with them - I can't remember the 4th - and in the 5th book it is just Luna. Neville says, on page 168 "i'm nobody." Is there a reason? Does he think of himself as nobody or does he just not want to be known? Cho comes into the compartment, by herself, and I do think she jumps around a bit. It has been what - two months? - since Cedric died and she already appears to be chasing Harry. So if she liked him all along, why was it so easy for her to stop liking him and fall out? She is really weird, that girl. I also got the impression that Luna perhaps fancies Ron. She laughed at his joke, a lot and she calls him Ronald, whic perhaps means something? She also seems to be looking at him on at least two occasions if I remember correctly. Someone made a point a while ago, that they thought Stubby Boardman is Regulus Black. I agree. All evidence appears to point this way. He is obviously not Sirius, and anyway, Sirius would not know for certain that Regulus was dead, he didn't go to his funeral. He was in Azkaban 15 years ago, wasn't he? The bit about Fudge, I believe was put in to make the Quibbler sound incredulous, when really the Black as he's painted story may have some relevance - or Rowling would not have mentioned it at all. Jadeau xxx --------------------------------- Download Yahoo! Messenger now for a chance to WIN Robbie Williams "Live At Knebworth DVD" [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk Sun Nov 30 15:39:20 2003 From: ladyramkin2000 at yahoo.co.uk (ladyramkin2000) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 15:39:20 -0000 Subject: Twitchy prowlingSnape? Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86202 Perhaps as a teenager, he experienced one of those sudden spurts in height that tend to occur around fifteen, resulting in an awkward, shambling walk. Both my sons went through this stage, before coming to terms with their own height. Snape is described as a tall man. It could be that, at an age of maximum sensitivity, this was his way of dealingwith his new, gangling body. Sylvia From lovelymelody at oreka.com Sun Nov 30 18:57:06 2003 From: lovelymelody at oreka.com (vesper_vane) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 18:57:06 -0000 Subject: marauders' house Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86203 Hi!I've nothing really new to bring here,but just a detail. The marauder's map...it is written in green,no? With green ink. A strange choice of color if they were all in Gryffindor... Vesper From bookie_kun at yahoo.com Sun Nov 30 20:40:31 2003 From: bookie_kun at yahoo.com (Beth G.) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 12:40:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HPforGrownups] Is Peeves a Ghost? was Re: Wizard to ghost? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20031130204031.53813.qmail@web60307.mail.yahoo.com> No: HPFGUIDX 86204 dj_bagshaw (kate_bag at hotmail.com) wrote: <> Ghosts, technically, are seen. Floating, scaring, or just kind of being; the way you know you have a ghost is if you see it. A "ghost" also refers basically anything dead. Poltergeists, on the other hand, are very a specific type of ghost. Poltergeists like destruction, as seen in Peeves. The most common things poltergeists can do are crashing plates or other valuable things, and normally their level of mischeviousness stops there although some go farther (according to the people who believe in them). One woman convicted of murder even said that her poltergeist had killed the person, not she (as best I can remember, if anyone remembers specifics please correct me). The overall point is that poltergeists don't have to be SEEN and they cause destruction instead of just floating. Now - to get onto what I really wanted to say - some people think that poltergeists are caused by negative and destructive energy, especially that of adolescences. In this case, what Nearly Headless Nick said fits in perfectly. "He's not really even a ghost," Nearly Headless Nick says and poltergeists, in this theory, AREN'T really ghosts. They're just collective negative energy not a dead person who needs to come back for whatever reason. So, could Peeves possibly not even be a real person, just the collective energy of all Hogwarts's students? Just my three knuts, ~Booksprite --------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] From gbannister10 at aol.com Sun Nov 30 21:15:16 2003 From: gbannister10 at aol.com (Geoff Bannister) Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 21:15:16 -0000 Subject: Is Peeves a Ghost? was Re: Wizard to ghost? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: No: HPFGUIDX 86205 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "dj_bagshaw" wrote: Kate: > So, ny question is, why is Peeves not really even a ghost? Is this > important, or was the speaker merely saying that Peeves didn't *act* > like a proper ghost? Is the distinction between ghost and > poltergiest (which I belive Peeves is mentioned as) so great that he > isn't considered a ghost? > Geoff: I think there is a translational problem here. In German, "der Geist" can translate as either "ghost" or "spirit". For example "der Heilige Geist" is the Holy Spirit or Holy Ghost depending on which version of the Bible you use. It also occurs in things like "Himbeergeist", which is a raspberry spirit in the alcoholic sense. So "der Poltergeist" is often rendered as "noisy spirit". The fact that Peeves can deal with physical objects such as water filled balloons and walking sticks suggests that, in the Potterverse at least, Peevs is not a ghost in that sense. Geoff